State Of Haryana And Another v. Shiv Charan Rawal




    
    

  !"# $%&%!'())*
  

  

 



 
    




    (  +

) ,
,-
.

 
,   /

) ,
 

    



  !

 "

!

$    
'

"

(!)* +  $ % ) ,,, ,-
.

 
,   0) 

  %&%  %% $-&) )&

.

$ + # $ -/ -)0 )/() ) 1313 )14 1316% ) # 7 &
-/&8+ $- - 

69:33 $136; ) <

146 $1313!%+-*&#!= #

)-+-  - )   + 1) $ '-/-  ++ % *-+ $% )))-

*& %(   % -* ) -  %-     - 

 %-  % #( ( )=-;>-$ ()  $$-&-/ -)=- %--   + $+   % )= %% -) - #  $$-+    39 6?29    )   + 

-  % )  = / -@) 15 6?29 *-+ $% )=

  )

--+

*& %($$-+-

*& %( % (   *-)  )  ) )  53 6??;

 -)  )  ) )  64

 AB <4C!

*& %( % (= (/)=- -( &

)# % ( %+ )-- A--C $ )) ) 1335!     --+ 

-#  *& %(  $$-+!  =  $ &$-&  

&-$-+ -  $- #
/ ( # /-*  %-  0 - - #
/ - % ( )-inter se- -#=    $-B)$ ()  $0 --/-=-& % ( % ) = ++ )-/&#%&

4 $- -#&-) )3;

6??2  /-* + $ & )
-/&E )/=   + (%&-  $ &# 66#  $*-+!% )= -&) % #( $1) !

=  + $- B)) -( &# 11 8$ & )
-/&E )/!( + $+ = =- / ) + -/ $%- ) $*-+)) - #$$-+-  

*& %(  % -*) - !  $ ( 6?29-&&53 6??;


$  + -/ $ +*-+$  % %  $/  $-+ +)!& &$  

(- - -  )  +%- ) +

&&# + ) $ % %  $B)-/ $- $1) -  -$ +  != =-/ ) % *--  +  -)  -  &  9  $      -*-& 
*-+  A )     /- C &!6?22A- $$)  F1 23 &7C &9 $ $6?22 &%+-$-&-/- -&-#$ /  $ 

< &4 $ &9 $6?22 &-&* $ %+ -) -  )-% )

(4) The eligibility for grant of the ACP scales shall further be subject to any other restriction as may be prescribed by the

4 Government from time to time including the restriction of the number of Government servant to be granted the respective ACP scales in terms of percentage of posts in the cadre to which such ACP placements shall be limited;

Provided that till the time such restrictions are not imposed by the Government.""

(a) there shall be no restriction on the number of Government servants to be granted the first or second ACP scales with reference to the Government servants covered in sub"rule (2) of rule 4.

(b) for the Government servants covered in sub" rule (1) of rule 4, there shall be no restriction on the number of Government servants for grant of first ACP scale. However, the grant of the second ACP scale for such Government servants as covered in sub"rule (1) of rule 4 shall be limited to 20% of the total posts in the cadre.?

%% )!= &#61% -+ ) 13> $ +%  & =

&$ B)-/ $- $  D &#! %% )! &#= % =

&=-& % )= %&

4-- -#&-!$ !=   -&) 1) - )-% ) 1) )6?22 &=

)(-- & = '-/$  %+- )%- ) $/  -$ + # *-+ -- %% $ (
+) & $6?22 & ;

&$ % )! =*! %& +)&- +

%  )% ) #
 " *(-&$!= #+ -

))--  &% =+ )$  --+

*& %($$-+ - $ +- )-% ) #
   D &#!+ )/ )-% )&#

 -6?

D -  $  -  =!% )= &)  + *)=-- ( - $13>%  $+ )=-%& -

4-- -#&-G :

&$   %& +)&- + %  $$-+(  1331!=-+&

? ) "Keeping in view the above detailed discussions, the government have now decided to withdraw the instructions bearing No.2/1/95"4PR(FD), dated 20.08.1996 and reiterate the FD's instructions dated 24.08.1981 whereby it was stipulated that for the purpose of calculating the selection grade posts, the permanent posts and such of the temporary posts in a cadre which have remained in existence for more than three years should be taken into account. Accordingly, the Government has decided that for the purpose of calculating selection grade posts, the permanent posts as well as temporary posts in a cadre which have remained in existence for more than three years should be taken into account. However, while making calculations, the fraction of three and above may be considered as whole number.

It has also been decided that for the computation of Selection Grade post in a cadre, the minimum number of posts in that cadre must be three if the selection grade stands sanctioned at 20% of the cadre and for a cadre strength of 3 to 7 posts, the Selection Grade at 20% should be admissible to one post only."

&$ % )!   & %& +) &- + % 0 )/( $ 7 &
%( - State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. Vs. Pawan Kumar Tiwari and Ors., 2005 SCC (L&S)

5 193!=- 7 &
%(  *) "7. The High Court has found mainly two faults with the process adopted by the State Government. First, the figure of 46.50 should have been rounded off to 47 and not to 46; and secondly, in the category of freedom fighters and ex"servicemen, total 3 posts have been earmarked as horizontally reserved by inserting such reservation into general quota of 46 posts which had the effect of pushing out of selection zone three candidates from merit list of general category.

7. We do not find fault with any of the two reasonings adopted by the High Court. The rule of rounding off based on logic and common sense is: if part is one"half or more, its value shall be increased to one and if part is less than half then its value shall be ignored. 46.50 should have been rounded off to 47 and not to 46 as has been done. If 47 candidates would have been considered for selection in general category, the respondent was sure to find a place in the list of selected meritorious candidates and hence entitled to appointment." ?

$  - +- -$$-+( 

+ +)!-+& &#% *-) =-&( '-/+ - !$ +-  $ 5

*( # + -)) = & (  %+ !-$=+ 13>$ (+ )/ $6?!

&% = &)= '  5 = %%&#$$-+ (  1331!5 2   + ) F47 *-= $ $$-+(  ( )% ) -/%&

4- - -#&-!% )= &) + *)=--13> ( &&

* $ =-+/ )= &) 

&$ /  &$   ! =*! ( )( # )  (% -@ -$+ - -

*( -  ) !-= &)  +13>D $-B)$ /  $ )- = &) +

&&# + (16 $  &#!=)  $-) #%& )-/!

--%&#$-&) #  $ & )
-/&E )/ 

$ - -% %% & )(   13>D

= &)     +)  -$     )-/  $$  %-+-%&  -  (  $  $$-+ (  1331-&-) %   +*-= $(  /$ )-$$  !=  -+&-) ) *-= $& )
-/&E )/ % ) = &) -&)  $- $1) + (%&-  $66# *-+

$-+& -  $-= '-/$ (6?29 6??;=-

-#  % -*) -  *-= $

*!% %% && +'(- ++ )-/&# )-(-) )-/ %%&-+ - AC!-$ #! ))-% ) $ A,-
.

 
, C      

 

  ))*
-& ) Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No