ZUBDA-TUL-HUSSAIN, J.---Nazir Ahmad father of the writ petitioner after serving as Chowkidar in the office of the Deputy Commissioner Bahawalpur retired from service on 15.6.2001. Under the impression that his son was entitled to be given appointment in the same Department/office on the retirement of his father, he submitted an application for the purpose, but, it is alleged, the same was not considered.
2. Subsequently the Executive District Officer (Revenue) Bahawalpur respondent No. 2 advertised various posts of Naib Qasid, Chokidars, Baildars and Malies etc. And invited applications from the eligible candidates. The petitioner also submitted an application for the post of Naib Qasid/Chowkidar against the 20% quota reserved for the children of in-service or retired employees of the Government but was not given the appointment. It has been pointed out that the Departmental Selection Committee herein cited as respondent No. 4, did not adopt the proper method of recruitment as prescribed under Rule 3 of the Punjab Civil Service (Ratio of Recruitment)
Rules, 1973 and instead of applying the quota to the total number of the posts in the Cadre calculated the same only on the basis of the advertised vacancies. The petitioner has accordingly requested that the respondents may be directed to appoint him as Naib Qasid/Chowkidar in BS-1 under the 20% reserved quota for the children of the working or retired civil servants.
3. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners are the son of a retied employee of the Revenue Department. That being so his right to be considered for appointment against 20% quota cannot be denied. The four respondents played was that instead of calculating the 20% quota against the total No. Of the posts in the cadre, determined the same only against the posts, which were advertised for recruitment. This mode of calculation of posts was undoubtedly against the mandate of Punjab Civil Service (Ratios of Recruitment) Rules, 1973.
4. The stance taken by the respondents that the reserved quota is to be applied only to the number of posts/vacancies announced for recruitment and not against the total number of posts in the cadre is simply farcical and is patently illegal. Rule 3 ibid provides that the ratio of recruitment shall be applied to the total number of posts in the Cadre. It cannot be applied to the number of the posts advertised/announced for the time being. The reason is obvious. If the ratio of the reserved quota is applied to the posts advertised for recruitment, the reserved quota employees will be under-represented.
5. Where the recruitment in terms of quota is reserved it has to be given precedence over the other appointments for maintaining the ratio prescribed under the law. The direct recruitment no doubt is a right of the eligible candidates but it can be given effect only when the reserved quota has been exhausted and a vacancy remained available for direct appointment.
6. In the present case not only the aforesaid advertisement but the recruitment policy issued by the Government of the Punjab Service and General Administration Department (Regulations Wings) dated 17.9.2004 also exhaustively laid down the process and the procedure for recruitment. Para 12 of the policy laid down as under:- "12. The following quotas have already been provided under various notifications and shall continue.
(i) 2% quota for disabled persons as per Notification No. SOR.III-2- 86/97 dated 28.1.1999, and in keeping with instrucation issued vide No. SOR IV(S&GAD)7-1/2003, dated 15.4.2004,
(ii) 5% quota for women as prescribed vide Notification No. SOR-III, 1-35/93, dated 17.4.2002, (i.e) 20% quota of posts in BS-1 for the children of serving government employees in BS-1 to 5, as prescribed vide Notification No. SOR-III, 122/90, dated 1.9.1993. Explanation: The posts reserved for quotas mentioned above to be filled only at the time of making general recruitment through advertisement under the Recruitment Policy."
(Note: A copy of the minutes of the meeting of District Selection Committee Bahawalpur (Revenue Department) held on 30.6.2006 has been included in the record of this writ petition as Mark "B")
7. It is admitted by the respondents and is very much borne out by the minutes of the meeting of the District Selection Committee Bahawalpur (Revenue Department) held on 30.6.2006 that 17 posts were vacant for recruitment of Naib Qasids. The Selection Committee in para No. 2 of the Minutes determined the ratio of appointments against various categories/quotas as under:--- "There were 17 vacancies of Naib Qasids to be filled in as per following Break up:---
(1) 12 Posts Through open merit.
(2) 03 Posts From among the children of the employees BS-1 to 5 against their quota.
(3) 2 Posts Disabled quota.
A total No. Of 676 applications against open quota and 47 applications against reserved quota for children of employees and 7 applications against Disabled quota were received."
"(ii) Out of 47 applications for the post of Naib Qasid against reserved quota of children of the employees, 24 candidates appeared for interview.
The Committee recommended the following candidates for appointment as Naib Qasid (BS-1):-
(1) Mr. Amir Mehmood son of Iqbal Ahmad.
(2) Mr. Rashid Mahmood son of Muhammad Rafique.
(3) Mr. Muhammad Ajmal Khan son of Nazar Muhammad Khan.
(i.e) Against 2 vacancies of disabled quota as many as 8 applications were received. After interview the Committee recommended following candidates for appointment as Naib Qasid.
(1) Mr. Zafar Iqbal son of Allah Bakhsh.
(2) Mr. Muhammad Abid son of Habib Ahmad Shah."
8. The wrong done by the respondents is obvious from the very minutes of the committee. At the time of hearing of this writ petition, Litigation Officer of the respondent-Department was also present. During the hearing it has transpired that the number of the vacancies against the reserved quota of 20% when calculated in accordance with rule of the Punjab Civil Service (Ratios of Recruitment) Rules, 1973 exceeds the total number of posts of Naib Qasid announced by the Department for recruitment. It has also transpired that the 20% quota reserved for the children of the in-service and retired employees of Revenue Department has not yet been exhausted and the unfilled posts of the quota or in excess of the three posts filled up through the impugned recruitment. These facts are evident from the statement Mark "C" obtained and placed on the record of this writ petition.
9. The Departmental Authorities who have to make appointments to any post in the government office have to exercise their authority honestly and objectively in public interest and strictly in accordance with law without being influenced by any extraneous consideration or the subordination of any superior authority. In the instant case it has become abundantly clear that the Departmental Selection Committee and then the Appointing Authority both erred in law while allocating the seats to the candidates against the posts for reserved quota.
10. The Writ Petition is allowed with Costs. The petitioner shall be considered for appointment against the reserved quota of the number of vacancies to be calculated in accordance with rule 3 of the Punjab Civil Service (Ratio of Recruitment) Rules, 1973 by applying the same to the total number of posts of Naib Qasids in the Cadre so as lo maintain the prescribed percentage of the over all strength of the cadre and not to the actual vacancies existing or announced at a given time.
11. In order that effective relief is provided to the petitioner, it is further ordered that it shall be the personal responsibility of the present incumbent of the Appointing Authority to undertake all necessary and effective measures, including the following, to implement this judgment within a period of thirty days:---
(i) The number of the posts against reserved quota is calculated in accordance with rule 3 of the Punjab Civil Service (Ratio of Recruitment) Rules, 1973 by applying the 20% quota to the total number of posts in the Cadre;
(ii) The case of the petitioner for appointment against such calculated reserved seats shall be considered on the basis of the merit determined by the Departmental Selection Committee. A copy of the five page list of 47 candidates on which the merit of the candidates has also been determined in terms of the marks obtained by them has been placed on the file of this writ petition as Mark An; (i.e) If the petitioner is eligible for appointment on the basis of the merit list against one of the seats calculated in the above manner, he shall be offered and given appointment with effect from the date the other candidates in the same cadre/category were given appointment;
(iv) The petitioner, in case of appointment shall be entitled to all back-benefits as well because he was not only deprived of his valuable rights but was also unnecessarily dragged into litigation by contesting a cause to which the respondents had no justification for defence..