IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 15788/2008 Reserved on: 2.6.2011 Decided on:15.6.2011 _____________________________________________ Nindra. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and another. …Respondents. _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes For the petitioner : Mr. Himmat Negi Advocate Vice Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. ____________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Forest Department issued advertisement for filling up 447 posts of Forest Guards in the year 2006. Process was initiated vide Annexure R-1 dated 22.6.2006. 25 posts were to be filled up by Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Wild Life, as per Annexure R-1. 3% posts were reserved for distinguished sports persons against the sports quota as per reservation roster adopted vide letter dated 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 30.6.2005. The date of advertisement was 30.6.2006 and the last date of applications and sponsorship from Employment Exchanges etc. was 20.7.2006. Date of submission of mark-sheet by candidates sponsored by Employment Exchanges was 10.8.2006 and the date of intimation to shortlisted candidates and conducting of physical test and interview was 10.9.2006. According to Annexure R-II dated 20.6.2006, one post was reserved for sports persons out of 25 posts in the Wild Life Wing. According to Annexures R-1 and R-II since the cadre of Forest Guards was of circle level, the whole process starting from advertisement, constitution of selection committees, physical test/interview and selection etc. was to be done at circle level. Petitioner submitted application for considering her candidature against one post reserved for sports persons. Her name was recommended as per Annexure A-1 dated 22.7.2006. She was also interviewed. However, in the meantime since Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post of Forest Guard were amended vide notification dated 2.4.2007, the State Government took a decision on 7.4.2007 vide Annexure R-III to fill up 661 posts instead of 447 posts according to the Recruitment and 3 Promotion Rules notified vide notification dated 2.4.2007. According to Annexure R-IV and the instructions annexed with it, 60 marks were carved out for written test, 15 marks for personality test and 25 marks for physical efficiency test. The final merit list was to be prepared for each circle category-wise, i.e. general, O.B.C., Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes etc. on the basis of the total marks in each category, i.e. physical efficiency test, written test and personality test. According to Annexures R-I, R-III and R-V, 43 posts were to be filled up by Wild Life Wing against direct quota. Two posts were to be empanelled for future vacancies. In fact, 41 posts were offered for appointment. These posts were to be filled up at circle level in accordance with the Himachal Pradesh Forest Department Forest Guard, Class-III (Non-Gazetted (Executive Section) Recruitment and promotion Rules, 2003 as amended from time to time. 21 posts were to be filled up in South Shimla, 13 posts North Dharamshala and 9 posts were to be filled up in N.P. Shamshi. According to Annexure R-V, no seat was reserved for sports persons’ quota. Petitioner submitted application vide Annexure R-VI for considering her candidature in general category. 4 Petitioner qualified physical efficiency test, written test and was called for interview. However, she could not be offered appointment since her merit was low. 2. Mr. Himmat Negi has strenuously argued that the candidature of the petitioner was considered against the post reserved for sports persons. 3. Mr. R.P. Singh has vehemently argued that according to the new advertisement though in fact total sports persons’ quota increased from 12 in the year 2006 to 15 in the year 2007, however, as per roster maintained at circle level, no post was reserved for sports persons category in Wild Life Wing. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully. 5. It is true that initially, one post was reserved for sports persons against which the case of the petitioner was considered, however, the earlier process initiated vide Annexures R-I and R-II was cancelled in view of the amended Recruitment and Promotion Rules, which came into force on 2.4.2007. Petitioner has not assailed the cancellation of earlier selection process. She had rather submitted application for considering her candidature against general category. It is evident from Annexure R-V that 5 no post was reserved for sports persons’ quota in circle-wise horizontal reservation meant for South Shimla, North Dharamshala and N.P. Shamshi. It is in these circumstances that the candidature of the petitioner could be considered only against general category and not against sports persons’ quota. It is evident from Annexure R-V that the posts were to be filled up at the circle level since the cadre of Forest Guards is maintained at circle level. Detailed procedure has been given in notification dated 2.4.2007 the manner in which the posts of Forest Guards is to be filled up. There is a detailed procedure the manner in which the posts are to be advertised. Thereafter, the screening of the candidates has to be undertaken. Though the petitioner has qualified the physical efficiency test and written test and was called for interview, however, in the final merit list, the name of the petitioner did not figure as she was low in merit. 6. Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, there is no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. 15.6. 2011*awasthi*