Harkiran Singh vs State of Punjab and Another

Surya Kant, J.

Notice of motion.

Ms. Munisha Gandhi, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Let two copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned State counsel during the course of day failing which the order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution.

In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, there is no necessity to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage.

The petitioner belongs to reserved category of Scheduled Caste. He appeared in the main competitive examination for Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) and got 44.44% marks. Since he has not been able to secure the minimum qualifying marks, i.e., 45% marks, he questions the vires of Rules 7 & 8 of the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) (Third Amendment) Rules, 2008, whereby identical ''qualifying marks'' have been prescribed for General Category and Scheduled Castes candidates. The petitioner relies upon certain observations given by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in case Ram Bhagat and another v. State of Haryana, 1987 (5) SLR 127 on the differentiation of standard for General Category candidates vis-�-vis Reserved Category candidates in competitive examinations. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the statutory rules can be struck down by a Writ Court essentially on two counts, namely, when such a rule has been enacted by the Authority incompetent to frame those rules or if it violates any Constitutional or legal rights. The prescription of minimum qualifying marks is a matter of policy and the exercise to determine such qualifying marks predominantly falls within the domain of Rules Making Authority. Be that as it may, if the existing rules are causing any hardship to the reserved category candidates or by virtue thereof, if sufficient number of candidates of reserved category are not likely to qualify the examination which would indirectly defeat the very purpose of reservation, the Competent Authority can consider the desirability to carry out necessary changes/relaxation in the rules, if so required. Consequently, without expressing any views on merits, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to treat this writ petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioner and other similarly placed candidates and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. It shall be appreciated if the decision is taken as early as possible and within a period of one month from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

Dasti.