Judgment N. Pandey, J. 1. This writ-petition has been filed for quashing the notification No.17/a-2-95/95-11 (17)/health dated 19th January, 1996,whereby and whereunder, Dr. Kumar Deo Pujan (respondent No.5) was appointed to the post of Resident Surgical Officer, plastic Surgery Department, Patna medical College Hospital, Patna. A prayer has also been made to command the respondents to appoint the petitioner against such a post since he had duly qualified after getting sufficiently higher points than respondent no.5. 2. The facts of this case are not much in dispute. The Department of health, Medical Education and Family welfare, with a view to make various appointments against teaching and nonteaching posts in different Medical colleges of this State, vide advertisement dated 25th July, 1992 invited applications from the qualified candidates. The petitioner and respondent No.5 along with several other applied for the post of Resident Surgical Officer. The respondent authorities after having examined relevant certificates as well as other materials published a panel of 29 candidates for appointment to the post of Resident Surgical Officer, Plastic surgery Department. The petitioner was awarded 10 (ten) points whereas respondent No.5 got-4 (minu) fours points. Accordingly, the petitioner got 17th position in the panel whereas respondent No.5 was placed at the bottom of the panel, i. e.29th position. 3. It appears from the advertisement that the candidates who were included in the panel are entitled for appointment against the vacancies, which fell vacant in between 9th january, 1993 to December, 1993. It was also clarified that such medical Officer, who were found unsuccessful for more than three occasions at the M. B. B. S. examination would not be entitled to make application. Condition No.5 (Ch)of the advertisement shows that for appointment to the post of Resident surgical Officer. A candidate must get minimum 04 points. But in absence of any suitable candidate, the State government will have a right to grant relaxation. Condition No.9 of the Advertisement of course shows that while considering the claim of the candidates, belonging to Scheduled Castes and scheduled Tribes, appropriate relaxation can be granted to any of the conditions of the advertisement. Condition no.15 further indicates that evaluation etc. with regard to academic qualifications can be considered with respect to the achievements, gained by candidate up to 30th January, 1992. In other words, if any candidate gets additional educational and professional qualification etc. Condition no.15 further indicates that evaluation etc. with regard to academic qualifications can be considered with respect to the achievements, gained by candidate up to 30th January, 1992. In other words, if any candidate gets additional educational and professional qualification etc. after the said cut-off date, he would not be entitled to get any additional benefit. 4. Dr. Jha learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that, the respondent authorities have deliberately violated several conditions of the advertisement in order to make appointment of respondent No.5. It is stated admittedly respondent No.5 had plucked on five occasions in the m. B. B. S. examination whereas condition No.2 (k) shows that a candidate having plucked for more than three times, would not be entitled to make application. He further contended that as per condition No.5 (Ch) no candidate having less than 4 points was entitled to be considered, in case other candidates having better points were available. On the other hand, respondent No.5 had -4 (minus four) points and there were 28 candidates above him in the panel but the respondent authorities appointed him ignoring all these aspects. 5. Two separate counter-affidavits have been filed by respondents 2, 3 and 4 as also respondent No.5, taking stand that appointment of respondent No.5 was made against a post, reseived for scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. There is no denial that respondent No.5 was found unsuccessful on five occasions in M. B. B. S. Examination for there is a denial that had obtained-4 points. 6. Learned Advocate-General appearing for the State and Mr. Mukherji, sr. Advocate, who contested the matter on behalf of respondent No.5, contended that a bare reference to condition No.9 of the advertisement would indicate that the State Government had full liberty to relax any of the conditions in favour of a candidate, belonging to s. C. or S. T. It was next contended that respondent No.5 had only passed m. B. B. S. examination rather he had also passed the M. Ch. (Plastic Surgery)Final Examination of the Patna University, held in the month of January, 1993. That apart, he had also experience of working as House Surgeon, Sr. House surgeon in Patna Medical College as well as Indira Gandhi Central Casualty. Unit. (Plastic Surgery)Final Examination of the Patna University, held in the month of January, 1993. That apart, he had also experience of working as House Surgeon, Sr. House surgeon in Patna Medical College as well as Indira Gandhi Central Casualty. Unit. Therefore, there was nothing wrong if the State Government having taken into consideration all such aspects as also since post in question was required to be filled up by a candidate belonging to S. C. or S. T. and there was no other candidate of that category, appointed, respondent No.5 after relaxing the conditions of the advertisement. 7. In my view, simply because respondent No.5 had passed M. Ch. Examination in the year, 1993, he would not be entitled to get a preference over the petitioner. Because the petitioner had also passed the said examination, conducted by the Patna University in the month of July, 1988. That apart, a bare reference to the condition No.15 of the advertisement would indicate that a candidate getting any achievement including academic qualification, etc. after 30th January, 1992 would not be entitled to get any benefit or additional point. Therefore, respondent No.5, who passed M. Ch. examination in the month of January, 1993 would not be entitled for any additional point. On the other hand, I have already indicated the " petitioner had passed the said examination in the month of July, 1988, i. e. much before the out-off date fixed in the advertisement. 8. There cannot be any dispute that as per condition No.9 of the advertisement, the State Government had full liberty to relax any of the conditions of the advertisement in favour of a candidate belonging to S. C. or S. T. But such relaxation cannot be arbitrary, ignoring the minimum basic requirements for appointments. It has always to be remembered that appointments in Medical colleges against teaching or non-teaching posts and to those made in other departments of the State Govt. cannot be treated at par. I have already indicated that admittedly respondent No.5 had plucked at five occasions at the m. B. B. S. examination. It has been noticed that in the merit list he was placed at the bottom of the panel, having secured 4 points, whereas candidates having obtained 5 to 14 points were available in the panel. Therefore, the exercise of the power of the State authorities cannot be whimsical and arbitrary. It has been noticed that in the merit list he was placed at the bottom of the panel, having secured 4 points, whereas candidates having obtained 5 to 14 points were available in the panel. Therefore, the exercise of the power of the State authorities cannot be whimsical and arbitrary. Any mechanism, provided to achieve that end must have nexus to the object sought to be achieved. 9. Apart from what has been noticed above, this cannot be ignored that as per the advertisement, candidates who are included in the panel were only entitled for appointment against the vacancies occurring between 9th January, 1993 to 31st December, 1993 and not against the vacancies which fell vacant thereafter. Un-disputedly the vacancy in question which occurred during the aforesaid period was caused on expiry of three years terms of Dr. Birendra Kishore sharma who had joined as Resident surgical Officer, Plastic Surgery, on 14th January, 1990. There is no denial that Dr. Sharma was a candidate of general category. It would also be useful to notice that against the remaining two other posts of Resident Surgical Officer, plastic Surgery, Dr. Surendra Roy, a candidate of general category, had joined P. M. C. H. on 18th December, 1991 and whose tenure expired after three years with effect from 17th december, 1994, whereas the 3rd candidate Dr. Rakesh Kumar, a S. C. candidate had joined as Resident Surgical officer, Plastic Surgery, in Nalanda medical College Hospital, Patna, on 18th December, 1991 and thus, his tenure expired after three years, i. e. on 17th December, 1994. From the aforesaid narration of the facts, it is thus, apparent that out of three posts of resident Surgical Officer, Dr. Rakesh kumar (a member of S. C.) was appointed against one of the post, which fell vacant on 17th December, 1994. 10. On behalf of the State as well as respondent No.5 it has been admitted that the appointment in question was made against the vacancy caused on expiry of three years tenure of Dr. Birendra Kumar Sharma, a candidate of general category. There is no dispute that out of three posts, one has been reserved for the candidate, belonging to s. C. /s. T. I have already noticed that the post, which was allotted to a S. C. candidate fell vacant on 17th December, 1994. Birendra Kumar Sharma, a candidate of general category. There is no dispute that out of three posts, one has been reserved for the candidate, belonging to s. C. /s. T. I have already noticed that the post, which was allotted to a S. C. candidate fell vacant on 17th December, 1994. Therefore, it cannot be denied that percentage prescribed by the State government for reservation was full during 9th January, 1993 to 31st December, 1993. In such a situation the operation of the roster for appointment of a candidate of S. C. /s. T. could only start operating after 17th December, 1994 when the tenure of Dr. Rakesh Kumar expired. 11. The question regarding policy of the State Government for reservation and applicability of the roster system has been examined by the Apex Court in the case of R. K. Sabharwal and ors. V/s. State of Punjab and Ors. A. I. R.1995 S. C.1371. It was held that "running account" of a roster can only operate till the quota provided is reached and not thereafter. Once the prescribed percentage of post is filled, the numerical test of adequacy is satisfied and thereafter, the roster does not survive. It would be appropriate to quote a relevant passage of aforesaid report hereunder : - "when the total number of posts in a cadre are filled by the operation of the roster then the result envisaged by the impugned instructions is achieved. In other words, in a cadre of 100 posts when the posts earmarked in the roster for the scheduled Castes and the Backward classes are filled the percentage of reservation provided for the reserved categories is achieved. We see no justification to operate the roster thereafter. The "running account" is to operate only till the quota provided under the impugned instructions is reached and not thereafter. Once the prescribed percentage of posts is filled the numerical test of adequacy is satisfied and thereafter the roster does not survive. The percentage of reservation is the desired representation of the Backward Classes in the State services and is consistent with the demographic estimate based on the proportion worked out in relation to their population. The numerical quota of posts is not a shifting boundary but represents a figure with due application of mind. The percentage of reservation is the desired representation of the Backward Classes in the State services and is consistent with the demographic estimate based on the proportion worked out in relation to their population. The numerical quota of posts is not a shifting boundary but represents a figure with due application of mind. Therefore, the only way to assure equality of opportunity to the backward Classes and the general category is to permit the roster to operate till the time the respective appointees/promotees occupy the posts meant for them in the roster. The operation of the roster and the "running account" must come to an end thereafter. The vacancies arising in the cadre, after the initial posts are filled, will pose no difficulty. As and when there is a particular post the same has to be filled from amongst the category to which the post belonged in the roster. . . . " 12. Even recently the Supreme court in the case of Ajit Singh Januja and ors. V/s. State of Punjab and Ors. , AIR 19% s. C.1189 while reiterating the views, ex pressed in the case of R. K. Sabhanwal and ors. V/s. State of Punjab and Ors. (supra), held thus: "if the contention of the respondents is accepted as has been done by the High court that such appointees/promotees can be considered against posts meant for general category candidates merely because they have become senior on basis of accelerated promotions then, according to us, that exercise shall amount to circumvening the judgment of the Constitution Bench of this Court in the sabharwals case because for all practical purposes the promotions of such candidates are being continued like a running account although the percentage of reservation provided for them has been reached and achieved. Once such reserved percentage has been achieved and even the operation of the roster has stopped, then how it will be permissible toconsider such candidates for being promoted against the general category posts on the basis of their accelerated promotion, which has been achieved by reservation and roster. " 13. Apart from the question of reservation I have already indicated that respondent No.5 having obtained - 4 points and placed at the bottom of the panel, was not at all entitled for appointment ignoring several other candidates, who had obtained 5 to 14 points. " 13. Apart from the question of reservation I have already indicated that respondent No.5 having obtained - 4 points and placed at the bottom of the panel, was not at all entitled for appointment ignoring several other candidates, who had obtained 5 to 14 points. It has also been noticed that as per the terms of advertisement candidates who were found unsuccessful at the M. B. B. S. examination continuously for three occasions were not entitled for making application. Unfortunately, respondent No.5 had failed at five times but in spite of that his case was considered by the authorities. I am cons trained to state that framers of constitution never imagined the situation that under the garb of the reservation policy State in exercise of its discretionary power will appoint a person who had so many demerits. Learned advocate-General has tried his best to contest the matter showing that as per the condition No.9 of the advertisement, Government had full liberty to relax any of the conditions in favour of a candiate, belonging to S. C. /s. T A question may arise whether such an ex-ercise of whimsical and arbitrary power by the State authorities can be upheld. It is well settled that action of the State authorities must fulfil the test of reasonableness as enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. In order to test the reasonableness and arbitrariness one should also try to find out whether the action of the State is backed by reasons. In this regard it would be appropriate to place reliance over a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi etc. etc. V/s. State of U. P and Ors. , AIR 1991 sc 537 . "36. The meaning and true import of arbitrariness is more easily visualized then precisely stated or defined. The question, whether an impugned act is arbitrary or not ultimately to be answered on the facts and the circumstances of a given case. An obvious test to apply is to see whether there is any discernible principle emerging from the impugned act and if so, does it satisfy the test of reasonable-ness. Where a mode is prescribed for doing an act and there is no impediment in following and in a manner which does not disclose any discernible principle which is reasonable, may itself attract the vice of arbitrariness. . . . Where a mode is prescribed for doing an act and there is no impediment in following and in a manner which does not disclose any discernible principle which is reasonable, may itself attract the vice of arbitrariness. . . . " 14. Therefore, having regard to the facts, stated above, I have no option but toehold that the decision of the authorities to appoint respondent No.5- against the post of Resident Surgical cuicer, Plastic Surgery, was highly ar-bitrary, ignoring all the prescribed norms. Accordingly, the impugned notification to the extent, it concerns with the appointment of respondent Ho.5 to the post of Resident Surgical Officer, Plastic Surgery, is hereby quashed. 15. Since the impugned order has been quashed, therefore the appointment against the post in question has to be made strictly in accordance with the merit list of the candidates. In other words, if any other candidate has higher points than the petitioner, certainly such candidate would have preference over him. Therefore, the respondent authorities while filling up the vacancy, which now fell vacant in view of the quashing of the appointment of respondent No.5, would certainly examine all these aspects. 16. As a result of quashing of appointment of respondent No.5, the writ application is, thus, allowed with a direction to the respondent authorities to fill up the vacancy in question in terms of observations/directions, made above. Order Accordingly.