IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 480 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 28, 2011 Anil Kumar ...Appellant Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Rajesh Khandelwal, Advocate, for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The learned Single Judge has non-suited the appellant on the ground that advertisement for appointment of 414 Gram Sachiv was issued in the year 1997 and the writ petition challenging the same was filed in the year 1999 on the ground that for the category of Backward Classes only 10% reservation was provided whereas according to the instructions dated 30.8.1995 (P-1/A), the reservation for Backward Classes was 27%. The explanation given by the respondent State is that the requisition for filling up the posts was sent in the year 1993 when reservation to the extent of 10% was prevailing as per instructions issued in the year 1979 and, therefore, instructions dated 30.8.1995 could not be followed. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition filed by the LPA No. LPA No. LPA No. LPA No. 480 480 480 480 of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) 2 appellant on the premise that after 11 years of selection, the appellant could not be ordered to be appointed because his name did not figure in the waiting list. 2. Having heard learned counsel we are of the considered view that once the requisition was sent in the year 1993, it cannot be said that prescribing reservation to the extent of 10% was wholly unjustified. Even otherwise after such a long gap of time it is not possible to order appointment of the appellant. The view taken by the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference of this Court. Dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE (GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH) July July July July 28, 201 201 201 2011 JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE Pkapoor