IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 4467 of 2011. Decided on: July 14, 2011. Bihari Lal Vrs. State of H.P. & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner: For the respondents: Ms. Bhawna Dutta, Advocate.. Mr. R.K.Bawa, AG, with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. AG. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner claims the benefit of regular appointment in terms of the vacancies reserved for the physically challenged persons to the extent of 3%. An identical issue was considered by this Court in the case of similarly situated employees of the Animal Husbandry Department by judgment dated 28.10.2010 in CWP No. 2466 of 2010 alongwith connected cases. The text of the judgment, reads as follows: “In these writ petitions the petitioners claim regular appointment from the date(s) of their appointment(s) since they have been recruited against the posts reserved for physically challenged persons. In the reply furnished on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 5, it is admitted at para 4 that the department has implemented the provisions under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal opportunities, Protection of Rights and full Participation) Act, 1995. Further it is admitted at para 7 that “the department of Animal Husbandry had published the advertisement in the newspaper for filling up the posts of daily paid beldars on daily wages basis for the candidates belonging to the disabled category.” 2. The question is whether the department of Animal Husbandry has satisfied the 3% quota for disabled persons in terms of requirement under the Act No.11 of 1995. It cannot satisfy the requirement of reservation in regular service by engaging persons on daily wages. The requirement has to be satisfied against the cadre strength of beldars. Cadre strength of beldars has to be worked as the cadre strength of regular beldars and not of the daily waged beldars. Certainly, it is open to the department to define the cadre strength of regular beldars and cadre strength of daily waged beldars. If such a distinction is sought to be made by the department then the requirement under the statute is that 3% quota should be met in the cadre of daily waged beldars and in the case of regular beldars. It is not clear from the reply as to whether this requirement of law has been met by the Animal Husbandry department. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of as follows: There will be a direction to the Director, Animal Husbandry to see whether 3% quota of disabled persons has been met in the category of regular beldars. In case there is deficiency in the 3% quota in the cadre strength of regular beldars, the persons recruited in these cases shall be adjusted against those regular vacancies, since the recruitment process is the same for daily wages beldars 2 and regular beldars, . We make it clear that it is open to the Animal Husbandry department to ear-mark separate quota of 3% as against the daily waged beldars as well, subject to fulfillment of regular beldars in the ear-marked quota of 3%. Needful adjustments in the case of petitioners in the light of this judgment shall be done by the Director, Animal Husbandry, within a period of four months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioners. Consequential benefits shall also be disbursed within another period of two months.” 2. The judgment in principle applies to the case of the petitioner also. There will be direction to the second respondent/competent authority to look into the case of the petitioner in the light of what is held above and take appropriate action in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of production of copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. 3. The Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. July 14, 2011. ( Justice V.K.Sharma), (karan/vs) Judge.