IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10525 of 1989 (O&M) Date of decision:08.03.2011 Mohan Singh ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: None for the petitioner. Ms. Rita Kohli, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. There is no representation for the petitioner. I have examined the records and I have proceeded to disposed of the case with the assistance of the counsel for the State-Ms. Rita Kohli. 2. The writ petition contains a challenge to the order of the respondents in terms of which the 3rd respondent had been given promotion to the post of Accounts Officer treating the said post in the category of Assistant Controller Panchayati Raj Finance (ACPF) and rejecting the representation of the petitioner vide Annexure P-8. The contention of the petitioner was that the post of the Accounts Officer was a solitary post and, therefore, the rule of reservation could not have been Civil Writ Petition No.10525 of 1989 (O&M) - 2 - applied in the manner done by the respondents (Annexure P-2) 3. The reply by the State to the objection was that the post of Accounts Officer was borne on the cadre of ACPF/Accounts Officer, consisting of two posts. The State would respond referring to government instructions that in a cadre of less than 5, the second vacancy on the roster is to be offered to a member of schedule caste. The first vacancy has already been consumed by Shri Nirmal Singh, ACPF and the second vacancy has rightly been given to 3rd respondent. 4. I cannot fault the action of the respondents and would not find that the challenge would survive for favourable consideration. 5. The writ petition is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 08.03.2011 sanjeev