IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2140 of 2010 Date of decision: 19.6.2010 Surjit Kaur ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. and another …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting : For the Petitioner : Mr. Y.W.Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K.Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) Computation of vacancy by the DPC in preparation of select list for promotion to the issue to be considered in this case. The petitioner is aggrieved since she has not been considered for promotion to the post of Female Health Supervisor against the vacancy reserved for Scheduled Caste. According to the petitioner one such vacancy became available on 31.8.2008 as can be seen from Annexure P-4. That there was vacancy as above is not in dispute but the question is whether the petitioner should have been considered for that vacancy. In reply furnished by respondents No.1 and 2, it is submitted that when the Departmental Promotion Committee met on 27.8.2008, no candidate belonging to the category of Scheduled Caste 2 could have been considered since as such one post of Scheduled Caste had already been filled up in excess and it was for that reason, a DPC did not consider the same. 2. The Handbook on personnel matters Volume-I in the matter of method of calculation of vacancies by the DPC provides as follows:- “16.8. Medhod of calculating vacancies For holding meetings of the Departmental Promotion Committees, the precise number of vacancies for which select-list is to be prepared has to be worked out. From 23.6.1984, the number of regular vacancies that arose in each of the previous year/ years immediately preceding and the actual number of vacancies proposed to be filled in the current year is to be worked out and select list drawn yearwise. For calculating the number of vacancies in the current year, all vacancies anticipated during the next 12 months from Ist January to 31st December shall be taken into account and should include only the existing vacancies (duly sanctioned and not merely budgeted) and anticipated retirements and promotions. Short-term temporary vacancies as detailed in para 16.23 (3) should not be taken into account for preparing panels.” 3. It is clear from the procedure as prescribed and extracted above that all vacancies anticipated during 12 months period from 1st January to 31st December of the year concerned should be taken into account for the purpose of calculation of the total number of vacancies for which select list is to be prepared. It is also made clear in the provision that the anticipated retirements and promotions are also to be taken note of. What is to be excluded is only temporary or short term vacancies and the posts which are not duly sanctioned or budgeted. Therefore, the DPC has to take into consideration the vacancies which are likely to arise on account of promotion and retirement during the year in which 3 they meet and prepare select list accordingly providing also for appropriate reservation as per rules. As already stated above, it is seen from Annexure P-4 that in the year 1988 itself, three regular vacancies were likely to arise on account of retirement, as can be seen from serial No. 18, 30 and 31. As per prescribed procedure, the DPC has to take into account those retirement vacancies also since they met only on 27.8.2008. 4. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to convene a DPC and take appropriate action in the light of what is held above. The needful shall be done within two months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment . Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. June 19, 2010 (Justice Kuldip Singh), (GR) Judge.