Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8093 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vipin Sonkar And 05 Others Respondent :- Union Of India And 06 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyaveer Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Narendra Pratap Singh,Sanjay Kumar Om,Vinod Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Satyaveer Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri Uma Dutt Shukla, holding brief of Sri Narendra Pratap Singh, has appeared for respondent no. 7.
Sri Singh, at the very outset mentioned that the petitioner no. 2 does not want to press the writ petition and therefore, his name may be deleted in the array of the parties.
In view of the above statement, we treat the writ petition to be on behalf of writ petitioner nos. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 only and the name of petitioner no. 2 stands deleted.
The petitioners have challenged the advertisement no. I of 2017dated 31.01.2018 issued by the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel University of Agriculture & Technology, Meerut, by which several posts of Professor, Associate Professor and Assistant Professor as many as 34 departments of the University have been advertised.
In challenging the above advertisement the only contention of the petitioners is that the reservation has not been applied in the proper manner and that no seats have been shown to be reserved for S.C., S.T. and O.B.C. candidates.
It is settled in law that the reservation has to be applied department-wise and subject-wise.
A bare reading of the above advertisement reveals that is no subject more than two vacancies have been advertised and as such the reservation cannot be applied to the posts so advertised.
In view of the aforesaid, the argument is that total 40 posts have been advertised, some of the posts ought to have been notified for the reserved category is not acceptable for the simple reason that the reservation has to be applied subject- wise and not on the total number of the posts advertised.
The writ petition as such lacks merit and is dismissed. Order Date :- 28.3.2018 Ishan