IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 83 of 2005 1. Managing Director, Uttaranchal Pey Jal Sansadhan Vikas Evam Nirman Nigam, 11 Mohini Road, Dehradun, District Dehradun. 2. Co-ordinator, Uttaranchal Pey Jal Sansadhan Vikas Evam Nirman Nigam, Recruitment Examination-2004. ……… Appellants Versus 1. Shailendra Bhatnagar S/o Sri Shayam Narayain Bhatnagar, R/o Canal Colony, Katoratal, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2. Lalit Kumar S/o Sri Suresh Kumar Verma, R/o Mohalla Rahamkhani, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Gopesh Pandey S/o Sri Ramesh Chandra Pandey, R/o Kumanchal Colony, Katoratal, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 4. Nand Kishor S/o Sri Puran Chandra, R/o SDM Residence, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 5. Pranay Dhyani S/o Sri Vishamber Dhyani, R/o Chamunda Vihar, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 6. Naeem Ahmed S/o Mohd. Ilyas, R/o Mohalla Nath Singh, Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 7. Tikraj Singh S/o Sri Praveen Singh, Village & Post Nadehi, District Udham Singh Nagar. 8. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary, Pey Jal (Uttaranchal), District Dehradun. ……… Respondents Mr. Sudhanshu Dhulia, Senior counsel with Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. K.S. Bhaskar, Advocate for respondents Nos. 2, 6 & 7. JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble V.K. Gupta, C.J. Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. V.K.GUPTA, C. J. (Oral) The learned Single Judge, in the course of the impugned judgment dated 30th June, 2005, while holding that the decision taken in the meeting of the Selection Committee on 4th December, 2004 as well as para 4 of the handbook containing information etc., clearly revealed that reservation was available as well as applicable to candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and O.B.C. and, since the writ petitioners No. 2 & 7, namely Lalit Kumar and Tikraj Singh, who are respondents Nos. 2 & 7 in this appeal also, had obtained more than 25% marks, they were entitled for being called for the interview. Stipulation was that only such persons would be called for interview, who obtained 35% marks (General Category) and 25% marks (Reserved Categories) in the written examination. In view of the clear fact that in the meeting of the Selection Committee held on 4th December, 2004, it was unequivocally decided that the candidates belonging to the reserved categories, who have obtained more than 25% marks, would be called for the interview and also, in view of the clear stipulation in the handbook of information that reserved posts shall be filled-up by candidates belonging to SC, ST and OBC, we are not inclined in this petition to go into any question with respect to the interpretation of the proviso to Article 335 of the Constitution of India and leave that question to be decided in some other case. Having discussed and decided that respondents Nos. 2 & 7 herein belonging to OBC and, thus, being entitled for being selected in the quota of reserved categories and having obtained more than 25% marks in the written examination, the learned Single Judge, in the operative part of the judgment, went on to issue a direction upon the appellants herein to call for interview all such candidates, who belonged to reserved categories and who had obtained 25% marks in the written examination. We do not agree with this view of the learned Single Judge because, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the relief as well as the direction for calling candidates for interview had to be confined only to such persons, who had approached the Court. It could not be extended to one and all irrespective of the fact that these persons had not approached the Court. While partly allowing the appeal and while upholding the judgment of the learned Single Judge, we modify the same by directing that only respondents Nos. 2 & 7 herein shall be called for interview. While partly allowing the appeal and while upholding the judgment of the learned Single Judge, we modify the same by directing that only respondents Nos. 2 & 7 herein shall be called for interview. The appeal is partly allowed. No order as to costs. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) (V.K. Gupta, C. J.) 24.03.2008 24.03.2008 G