IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.4615 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 25.4.2011 Vinod Kumar and another ....Petitioners Versus The State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Vikas Kuthiala, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana. Mr.J.S.Hooda, Advocate for respondent No.14. Mr.Kamal Mor, Advocate for respondents No.19 & 47. Mr.M.S.Tewatia, Advocate for respondents No.20, 28 and 33. Mr.Ramesh Malik, Advocate for Mr.Ashok Sehrawat, Advocate for respondent No.54. Mr.S.P.Chahar, Advocate for respondents No.52 and 59. Mr.R.K.Malik, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Vishal Malik, Advocate for respondents No.23, 51, 73, 78, 53 & 62. Mr.N.K.Malhotra, Advocate for respondents No.171 and 175. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. C.W.P.No.4615 of 2010 (O&M ) -2- The petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance that out of 189 posts meant for general category 63 posts were reserved for women and their plea was that the respondents have resorted to the process of vertical reservation by selecting the candidates belonging to the reserved category of women and have also selected women candidates against the general category thereby denying them their right to be appointed as teachers by flouting the principles of reservations. The respondents have refuted the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners and had contended that out of 189 candidates the women candidates were appointed strictly on the basis of merit and, therefore, there was no violation of the principles of reservation as the selected candidates for women's category far exceeded the reservation contemplated by the selection process. This Court on 12.1.2011 directed the respondent-State to file a categoric affidavit showing the status and manner in which these 189 posts of general category have been filled up. Pursuant to the aforesaid directions of this Court an additional affidavit of Shri P.D.Verma, Secretary, Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula has been filed in which it has been stated in para 2 as follows : “2. That there were 189 posts of general category and that being 33% horizontal reservation 63 female candidates are required to be selected. The Respondent- Commission has prepared the merit list of 189 total candidates of general category and on the basis of marks C.W.P.No.4615 of 2010 (O&M) -3- secured by the female candidates, 95 female candidates have been selected within 189 posts of general category. Therefore, 95 female candidates (63 being 33% horizontal quota and 32 over and above this quota) falls strictly within the marks for 189 posts of general category. The said selection has been made strictly as per well settled law of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Neelam Rani Vs. State of Punjab, RSJ 2010 page 70.” The situation, therefore, is now abundantly clear that out of 189 posts of general category there was a prescription of 33% horizontal reservation which required selection of 63 women candidates of the total number of candidates who have been appointed on merit. The selected candidates reveal a list of 95 successful women candidates which is 32 over and above the prescribed limit. In view of the aforesaid, the grievance of the petitioners apparently is ill-founded. The writ petition is thus held to be without any merit and is dismissed. 25.4.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss