JUDGMENT 1. This Writ petition was moved by the petitioner against the selection of the respondent No.6 in the post of the Reader under North Bengal University. The facts of the case, in short, are that an advertisement was made for the post of Reader of the University concerned for Zoology and Commerce (Specialisation Industrial Economics/Labour Relations) All the posts were reserved for the candidates belonging to SC/ST, provided they fulfilled the essential qualifications laid down. If SC/ST candidates were not found available or not found suitable posts would be filled up from general categories. Hence non SC/ST candidates might also apply. 2. The petitioner's case is that the petitioner was the only scheduled caste candidate for the post applied. But the petitioner was not selected and on the contrary the said post was filled up by selecting the respondent No.6 herein from open general category or in other words, from the non-scheduled cast and non-scheduled tribe category. 3. On behalf of the petitioner, it was submitted that when the post has been reserved for the scheduled cast and scheduled tribe candidate, then that post must be filled up by scheduled caste/scheduled tribe candidate and If no candidate is found suitable, then the post has to be carried forward in future for the purpose of filling up by that category. It was further suggested that in case no scheduled caste/scheduled tribe candidate was found suitable, in that event, it was obligator, on the part of the respondents concerned to make a fresh advertisement for filling up the said post. 4. On behalf of the University it was stated that a Selection Committee consisting of six eminent Professors was formed for the purpose of selection of candidates. Interview letters were issued for six candidates who applied for the said post of Reader in Zoology. But only four candidates including the petitioner appeared before the Selection Committee Including the petitioner and that the said Selection Committee considered the candidature of each candidate and prepared a panel consisting of Dr. Debesh Chandra Deb, Dr. Ananda Mukhopadhyay and Dr. Joydeb Pal. The Selection Committee also observed in the note of the resolution sheet that “the only scheduled caste candidates was not found suitable for the post". 5. Debesh Chandra Deb, Dr. Ananda Mukhopadhyay and Dr. Joydeb Pal. The Selection Committee also observed in the note of the resolution sheet that “the only scheduled caste candidates was not found suitable for the post". 5. It was stated on behalf of the University that six eminent Professors were the Members of the Selection Committee who considered this aspect of the matter and found that the scheduled caste candidate was not suitable and on the contrary found that the respondent No.6 was suitable candidate and according, such appointment has been made correctly and on the basis of the advertisement which provided that even though the post is reserved for the scheduled caste candidate, the post may be filled up by non scheduled caste candidate in case it was found that there was no suitable scheduled caste candidate and in the instant case suitable scheduled caste candidate was not found and that was the reasons for which the post was filled up from non scheduled caste categories. 6. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the action on the part of the respondents violated the provisions of Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India which provides that if any reservation is made for appointment in the post in favour of backward clause or citizens, the same could not be held to be discriminatory. Reliance was placed on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of (1) Dr. Chakradhar Paswan v. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in (1988)2 SCC 214 . In that case it was held that once the power to make reservation in favour of scheduled caste and scheduled tribes is exercised, it must necessarily follow that a roaster pointwise for the purpose of vacancies for which reservation has been made, must be brought into effect and in order to do full justice, a carry forward rule must be so applied that in any particular year there is not more than 50 years percent reservation. The proposition of law laid down by the aforesaid judgment is not helpful for adjudicating the dispute in this case, inasmuch as in the Instant case the post that was advertised for was one and it is also the firmly established principle that no reservation could be made under Article 16(4) so as to create a monopoly or in other words, if there is only one post, then it could not be reserved. But if there are number of post, in that event, reservation could be made for keeping the post reserved for scheduled caste and scheduled tribes candidates. 7. There is no material before this Court, either disclosed by the petitioner or by the respondents to show that there are number of posts and/or there was any roaster and/or carry forward rules. In my view, when the University has taken a decision that the post is reserved for scheduled caste and/or scheduled tribe candidate, but if scheduled caste and/or scheduled tribe candidate is not found suitable in that event that post may be filled up by other candidates, this sort of reservation, in my view is meaningless. Reservation means it must be reserved for a particular category and that has to be filled up by the members of that category. Otherwise, the word reservation will have no meaning. 8. The petitioner could not establish that there are number of posts and if that be so, in that event it was the duty of the University to consider whether the same should be kept exclusively reserved for scheduled caste and/or scheduled tribe candidate. Consequently, as held by the Supreme Court, there should be a roaster and in all fairness there should be carry forward rules. Unfortunately in this particular case nothing was done. On the basis of the materials on record, it is difficult to hold that the said post had to be filled only by scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidates. 9. On the basis of the materials on record, it extremely difficult to Interfere with the decision taken by the Selection Committee on the ground that the same was mala fide and/or biased. In view of the language used in the notice inviting applications, the petitioner cannot get any relief inasmuch as the petitioners candidature was considered and found not suitable. On the basis of the materials on record, it extremely difficult to Interfere with the decision taken by the Selection Committee on the ground that the same was mala fide and/or biased. In view of the language used in the notice inviting applications, the petitioner cannot get any relief inasmuch as the petitioners candidature was considered and found not suitable. The learned Advocate appearing for the University states that in future if any such post is to be filled up, then the respondents shall fill up the same by scheduled caste and/or scheduled tribe candidate. This is a vague statement and that such vague statement or stand cannot be allowed to be taken. Even though the petitioner is not entitled to any relief, I direct the University to consider the matter for reservation of some posts for scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidate and to make the reservation point wise and effective roaster should be made Indicating which posts are reserved and if the reserved post could not be filled up by the persons in whose favour it was reserved, in that event the provision should be made for carry forward so that the reservation becomes meaningful. Unfortunately, in this matter the University has not said anything. In the notice no guarantee was given that it should be filled up by scheduled caste and/or scheduled tribe candidates because of the language used. I make it clear that the University should take steps on the basis of the observations made in this judgment for the purpose of filling up the future vacancies keeping an eye to the provisions of Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India and make some reservation of some posts in favour of the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidates, but not in the manner done in this particular case, which, in my view, is nothing but meaningless. The next vacancy in the said post should be filled up strictly by scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidates and this assurance has been given by the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the University and in subsequent vacancies the petitioner would be at liberty to apply and It is needless to point out that such post should be filled up by scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidate and by no other candidate. With the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. With the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Interim order, if any, is vacated.