Civil Writ Petition No. 14887 of 2010 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 14887 of 2010 Date of Decision : 11.5.2011 Ashok Kumar & others .......... Petitioners Versus Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (POWERCOM) & others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present : Ms. Anu Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. H.S. Mattewal, Advocate for respondents No.1 & 2. **** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the Single Bench judgment of this Court in CWP No. 5774 of 2010 decided on 13.10.2010 titled as 'Sukhpreet Singh & Ors. vs. Punjab State Electricity Board', which was allowed by this Court relying upon the principles as settled by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in R.K. Sabharwal and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors. JT 1995(2) SC 351 as well as Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, JT 1992(6) SC 273 as also the judgments passed by this Court in CWP No. 5245 of 1996 (Mahender Singh vs. State of Haryana and Others) decided on 22-08-1996 and CWP No. 20560 of 2008 (Devender Singh v. State of Haryana and Anr.) decided on 17-3-2009 according to Civil Writ Petition No. 14887 of 2010 2 which the reserved category candidate who got higher merit position than that of the last appointed candidate of Open Category, should be treated as 'Open Category candidates' and the vacancies which arise because of their being treated in the general category should go to the persons next in the merit falling in that reserved category. Counsel for the petitioner contends that in the present case also the persons who got higher merit than the general category candidates in the common merit have not been treated and appointed in the open category but have been appointed against the reserved category posts, which is against the mandate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred judgments i.e. R.K. Sabharwal and Ors. case (supra) and Indra Sawhney's case (supra). Her further contention is that LPA No. 215 of 2011 titled Punjab State Electricity Board (now Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.) vs. Sukhpreet Singh and others, which was preferred by the respondent-Board against the said judgment of the learned Single Judge has been dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 9.2.2011 and thereafter Special Leave Petition preferred by the Punjab State Electricity Board i.e. Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No (s) 10062-10062 of 2011 was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 21.4.2011. She accordingly prays that the present writ petition being covered by the ratio of the judgments passed by this Court deserves to be allowed in the same terms. Counsel for the respondent could not dispute the contentions as raised by the counsel for the petitioners, however, he submits that as per the roster point the petitioners can not be held Civil Writ Petition No. 14887 of 2010 3 entitled to the claim which they had made in the present writ petition. He submits that if at the roster point the candidate belonging to the reserved category obtains higher marks than the person falling in the general category only then he would be considered for general category post otherwise he exhausted his claim to be considered in the general category. This contention of the learned counsel for the respondents in the light of the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e. R.K. Sabharwal and Ors. case (supra) and Indra Sawhney's case (supra) is misconceived, accordingly the same is rejected. The writ petition filed by the petitioners is allowed in the same terms as in CWP No. 5774 of 2010 decided on 13.10.2010 titled as 'Sukhpreet Singh & Ors. vs. Punjab State Electricity Board'. 11.5.2011 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) 'sp' JUDGE