Case: Haryana Public Service Commission Vs. Harinder Singh

The respondent applied for employment with the State of Haryana on the basis that he was the dependant of anThe Haryana Public Service Commission (the appellant) rejected the claim on the ground that he was not dependant upon his exserviceman father or his mother. The respondent filed a writ petition in the High Court at Chandigarh for a direction that he should be considered for selection against the reservation quota meant for dependants ofThe High Courts decision upon the writ petition reads, in its entirety, thusis directed to consider the petitioner eligible for the post he has applied for, as he falls in the expression `dependant, as his father was killed in INS Khukri duringWar of 1971. The writ petition stands disposed ofthis order could not be complied with because all the posts had been filled, the respondent moved an application before the High Court in regard to future selections and the High Court directed that the respondent should be considered for the same.The appellants are in appeal by special leave against the order on the writ petition and it has been stayed pending the disposal of the appeal.There is a reservation in regard to recruitment for the State Government for dependants of service personnel killed or disabled. Dependants are defined to include, besides the wife and widow, "dependant sons/daughters". After categorising certain persons, it is stated in the reservation policyof the persons mentioned at Sr. Nos. (i), (ii), (v) and (vi) falls within the definition of the word `dependant because each of them appears to have some independent source of livelihood and therefore, none of these can be said to be dependant on his father or mother."

Reasoning:
7. The whole idea of the reservation is that those who are dependent for their survival on men who have lost their lives or became disabled in the service of the nation should not suffer. The public purpose of such reservation would be totally lost if it were to be made available to those who are gainfully employed. There is no justification for construing the words "dependants ofin any manner other than that in which the appellant has construed them. This is in accord with the reservation policy itself, as shown by the quotation therefrom aforestated.