IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13893 of 2010 Date of Decision: August 06, 2010 Gaurav Garg .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Mandeep Sodhi, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing Annexure P-1 whereby reservation has been prescribed. Out of 85 vacancies, only 25 vacancies have been kept for general category. 2. The short contention of learned counsel is that more than 50% reservation cannot be allowed. 3. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioner filed a representation/ CWP No.13893 of 2010 [2] application (Annexure P-2) asking for the break- up of the seats allocated to various categories as per reservation criteria adopted by the respondents, however, no specific reply is coming forth as is evident from Annexure P-3. 4. Application, Annexure P-2 was filed under the Right to Information Act, 2005. 5. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner would like to file a representation detailing the reasons and grounds. 6. The petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a specific representation to the respondents. The respondents are directed to deal with the representation and respond to the queries raised by the petitioner. 7. In case, representation is filed within 15 days from today, the respondents would deal with the same within a period of three months of filing of the representation. The respondents are directed to pass a reasoned order and convey the same to the petitioner. (AJAI LAMBA) August 06, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?