JUDGMENT Hon’ble Sunil Ambwani, J.—Heard Shri S.P. Pandey, and Shri S.N. Gupta for the petitioners. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents. 2. All the petitioners claim to belong to Scheduled Caste traditionally engaged in the work of sweeping and cleaning. By this writ petition they have prayed for quashing a select list dated 30.8.2008 published on 31.8.2008 declaring the results of the selections of ‘Safai Karmis’ in district Lalitpur. 3. The State Government by a Government Order dated March 1st, 2008 issued by the Chief Secretary, Government of U.P. decided to sanction one post of ‘Safai Karmi in every revenue village with total number of 1,08,848 post in the State in the pay scale of Rs. 2550-55-2660-60-3200 on temporary basis for maintaining cleanliness in the villages. The object for creating the posts, given in the Government Order is to provide facilities of development in the villages, and to stop migration to the urban areas. It was found necessary to provide for proper drainage and cleanliness of the villages for which no arrangements were made so far and which affects the public health, sanitation and for prevention of communicable diseases. The Government Order provided that these posts shall be created on temporary basis upto 28th February, 2009, unless they were cancelled earlier; the Safai Karmi was provided to be the employee of Gram Panchayat and was to be appointed by the respective Gram Panchayats. The service rules providing for the process of appointment and other service conditions were to be notified separately. The second Government Order dated April 11th, 2008 the State Government provided with the consent of the Governor of Uttar Pradesh that the Safai Karmis to be appointed vide sanction of the posts by Government Order dated March 1st, 2008 shall be full time Government employees, who shall work under the Panchayati Raj Department. Their appointments shall be made by the District Level Officer (District Panchayat Raj Officer) and that service rules for their appointment and service conditions will be separately notified. The Government Order dated March 1st, 2008 was modified accordingly. 4. Their appointments shall be made by the District Level Officer (District Panchayat Raj Officer) and that service rules for their appointment and service conditions will be separately notified. The Government Order dated March 1st, 2008 was modified accordingly. 4. By a third Government Order dated June 6th, 2008 the State Government notified with the approval of the Governor of the State that the method of appointment of ‘Safai Karmis’, in continuation to the directions given in Government Orders dated 1.3.2008 and April 11th, 2008 shall be the same as it is prescribed in the Group-D Employees Service Rules, 1985, as amended from time to time. 5. The Group-D Employees Service Rules, 1985 did not provide for the method of recruitment of ‘Safai Karmi’. The sources of recruitment in Rule 6 for ‘Sewakar’ included in item (a) is by direct recruitment, whereas for ‘Safai Jamadar’ in item (e) is to be appointed by promotion from permanent Safaikar. The educational qualifications for the post other than peon, messenger and cyclostyle operator, is prescribed in Rule 10 and provides that there is no educational qualification required for the post but that preference shall be given to the person, who is educated and is able to atleast read and write Hindi in ‘devnagri script’. The method of recruitment provided in Rule 16 includes constitution of a selection committee, which includes (1) the appointing authority; (2) if the appointing authority does not belong to scheduled castes or scheduled tribe, an officer belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribe, nominated by the appointing authority; and (3) if appointing authority does not belong to OBC and officer to OBC nominated by the appointing authority with a proviso that if in the department or establishment, no such appropriate officer of the categories is available, on the request of the appointing authority the District Magistrate shall nominate such officer and if no such officer is appointed then an officer, who may be nominated by the Commissioner. The process of recruitment under Rule 19 provides for determination of vacancies by the appointing authority in sub-rule (1) to be sent to the employment office and for directly calling such of those, who are registered in the employment office; publication of such advertisement on the notice board and in atleast one local newspaper. All the applications shall be placed before the selection committee. All the applications shall be placed before the selection committee. When the selection committee receives under sub-rule (2) applications for both general and reserved categories, it shall interview the candidates and make selection on various posts. Sub-rule (3) provides that selection committee shall for the purposes of giving weightage to the retrenched employees shall give 5 marks for one year of completed service and 5 more marks for completed service of the other full years but these marks shall not be more than 15. The number of candidates, who are selected in sub-rule (4) shall not be more than 25% of the number of advertised vacancies and that select list will be prepared in accordance with the marks secured in the interviews. 6. The Group-D Employees Service Rules, 1985 do not provide for any written examination. The selections after wide advertisement are based only on the marks obtained by the candidates in interviews to be awarded by the selection committee constituted under Rule 6 of the Rules. 7. The District Panchayat Raj Officer issued an advertisement published in daily newspaper ‘Amar Ujala’ dated 17.6.2008 inviting applications for 754 posts of Safai Karmis in his department in District Lalitpur, sanctioned by Government Orders dated 11.4.2008 and 6.6.2008 to be filled up under Group ‘D’ Employees Service Rules, 1985. Out of these 754 posts, 159 were reserved for scheduled caste; 15 for scheduled tribe candidates; 203 for other backward class and the remaining 50% were to be filled up from the general categories. The reservations were provided to be made under the U.P. Reservation for (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1974. A note appended below the vacancies clarified that apart from the reservations to the categories of scheduled caste, scheduled tribe and other backward classes, the reservation will also be applicable to women, disabled, dependents of freedom fighters and ex-servicemen on horizontal basis. 8. The Clause-3 of the general directions in the advertisement provided that in accordance with Rule 10 (2) of the Group-D Employees Service Rules no educational qualification is prescribed for Safai Karmi but preference will be given to the person, who is educated and can atleast read and write Hindi in ‘devnagri script’. 8. The Clause-3 of the general directions in the advertisement provided that in accordance with Rule 10 (2) of the Group-D Employees Service Rules no educational qualification is prescribed for Safai Karmi but preference will be given to the person, who is educated and can atleast read and write Hindi in ‘devnagri script’. Clause-4 of the general directions provided that in accordance with Rule 10 (6) of the Group-D Employees Service Rules, 1985 it is necessary for a candidate for recruitment to any category of Group-D post that he should have the knowledge of cycling. This condition, however, was not to be applied to women candidates. 9. The Group-D Employees Service Rules, 1985 were amended by Notification dated July 18th, 2008. The amended rule inserted a new sub-rule (6) and also added sub-rule (8). It also amended Rule 16 providing for the constitution of the Selection Committee. The new Rule 10 (6) provided that no person shall be eligible for appointment to the post of Sweeper unless he is found to possess requisite knowledge pertaining to the work of Sweeper and has good experience in that work. The new sub-rule (6) is quoted as below : “(6) No person shall be eligible for appointment to the post of Sweeper unless he is found to possess requisite knowledge pertaining to the work of Sweeper and has good experience of that work.” 10. With regard to constitution of selection committee the new sub-rule (16) provided as follows : “16. For the purpose of direct recruitment to any post, the concerned District Magistrate shall constitute a Selection Committee as follows : (i) An officer nominated by the District Magistrate….Chairman (ii) An officer belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes nominated by the District Magistrate, if the Chairman does not belong to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. If the Chairman belongs to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, an officer other than belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or other the Other Backward Classes, shall be nominated by the appointing authority, if the appointing authority does not belong to the Other Backward Classes. If the Chairman belongs to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, an officer other than belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or other the Other Backward Classes, shall be nominated by the appointing authority, if the appointing authority does not belong to the Other Backward Classes. If the appointing authority belongs to the Other Backward Classes an officer other than Other Backward Classes or Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes shall be nominated by the appointing authority : Provided that if such suitable officer is not available in his department or organization on such officer shall, on the request of the appointing authority, be nominated by the District Magistrate and on failure to do so, by reason of non-availability of suitable officer, such officer shall be nominated by the Divisional Commissioner. Backward Classes shall be nominated by the District Magistrate……Member (iii) An officer belonging to the Other Backward Classes shall be nominated by the District Magistrate, if the Chairman does not belong to the Other Backward Classes. If the Chairman belongs to the Other Backward Classes, an officer other than belonging to the Other Backward Classes or Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes shall be nominated by the District Magistrate…..Member Note—The District Magistrate may for any special reason, constitute more than one Selection Committee.” 11. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Mirzapur took notice of the amendment of the rules made after the advertisement in the interview letters sent to each of the candidates. In the interview letters sent to Shri Balram Balmiki-petitioner No. 1, he was asked to appear at Sport Stadium, Lalitpur behind by-pass Lalitpur, Nehru Mahavidyalaya on 6.8.2008 at 10.00 a.m. for cycle test and for interviews at the office of District Panchayat Raj Officer, near Panchayat Bhawan Shri Varni Jain Inter College, Lalitpur. The applicants were also required to bring all his original certificates for giving weightage for those persons, who are educated and for proving that they have sufficient experience in the work of sweeping and cleaning. 12. It is stated that all the petitioners were issued interview letters. They appeared in the interviews and produced their certificates of having the experience as a daily rated casual labour working in railways, and other departments and were hopeful of their selections. The select list prepared on 30.8.2008 and declared on 31.8.2008, giving rise to this writ petition, did not include petitioner’s name. 13. They appeared in the interviews and produced their certificates of having the experience as a daily rated casual labour working in railways, and other departments and were hopeful of their selections. The select list prepared on 30.8.2008 and declared on 31.8.2008, giving rise to this writ petition, did not include petitioner’s name. 13. It is alleged that out of 159 scheduled caste candidates, only eight candidates belong to ‘Balmiki Samaj’, five belong to ‘Dhobi’ and remaining 146 candidates belong to ‘Ahirwar’ caste. In paragraph-19 of the writ petition, it is stated that Shri Feran Lal Ahirwar is the District President of Bahujan Samaj Party, Lalitpur and one Nathu Ram Kushwaha is the sitting M.L.A. from Lalitpur Sadar Constituency. The entire select list was prepared on the dictates of these two persons including the Chairman of the Selection Committee Shri J.C. Ahirwar, belonging to Ahirwar caste. 14. It is further stated in paragraphs 21 to 27 that out of 377 vacancies for open general category, the candidates were not available in sufficient numbers and only 19 candidates were selected and on remaining vacancies of general category Ahirwars were declared to be selected. The persons named on behalf had exercised their influence in the selections of persons of Ahirwar caste. Out of 203 posts reserved for other backward caste candidates most of the selected candidates are belonging to Kushwaha caste, who were selected on the dictates of Shri Nathu Ram Kushwaha a sitting MLA from Lalitpur Sadar Constituency of Bahujan Samaj Party. In paragraph 23 it is stated that in many cases the family members were selected. One Shri Chaman Lal Babra is having close relation with Shri J.C. Ahirwar, District Panchayat Raj Officer, Lalitpur. His daughter Smt. Sadhna and both the sons Shri Sandeep Kumar and Hari Shankar were selected. Similarly one Sita Ram son of Preetam Balmiki and his wife Smt. Rakhi were declared selected. There is one person namely Shri Rahul Kumar Balmiki is found to be selected at two places namely at serial No. 74 bearing roll No. 1144 and serial No. 186 bearing roll number 964. The Selection Committee did not give weightage to the experience certificates. It is alleged that on these grounds the entire selection suffers from favouritism and selecting all the candidates for extraneous considerations. The Selection Committee did not give weightage to the experience certificates. It is alleged that on these grounds the entire selection suffers from favouritism and selecting all the candidates for extraneous considerations. The selection committee did not adhere to merit and gave preference to the persons, who had experience in the working of sweeping and cleaning. 15. In the counter affidavit of Shri Jagdish Chandra Ahirwar, District Panchayat Raj Officer, Lalitpur, it is stated that in the selections reservations were provided to be given under the U.P. Reservations in Public Service for Other Backward Classes, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Act, 1984 which provides for reservation for general category at 50%; OBC at 27% and SC/ST at 23%. Accordingly 159 scheduled caste candidates; 15 scheduled tribe candidates and 202 other backward class candidates were to be selected. In paragraph-7 he has stated that out of 159 selected scheduled caste candidates, 120 persons belonging to ‘Balmiki’ caste; 34 to ‘Basore’ caste and the remaining belong to other scheduled caste categories. In paragraph-15 he has again stated that out of 159 scheduled caste candidates selected in the selections 120 persons belong to ‘Balmiki’ caste. 16. In paragraph-20 of the counter affidavit, it is stated by Shri J.C. Ahirwar, District Panchayat Raj Officer that he was the Chairman of the Selection Committee. He has denied that his daughter or son has been selected, rather at serial No. 23 one Shri Prabhu Dayal son of Phundi Lal and at Sl. No. 45 one Shri Ghasi Ram S/o Sarman Lal and in reserved category at Sl. No. 23 Smt. Guddi W/o Sri Roop Chand and at Sl. No. 45 Smt. Reeta Devi W/o Sri Mukesh Kumar and at Sl. No. 304 one Mukesh S/o Shri Chhiddu were selected. A copy of the select list has been filed at Annexure CA-1. The daughter of Shri Chaman Lal Ahirwar is married and is selected in reserved quota and that his sons, Shri Sandeep Kumar was selected in unreserved quota and Shri Hari Shanker in Scheduled Caste category. In para 23 of his affidavit, he has stated that the experience certificate was required to be annexed with the application form. No authority was nominated for issuing such certificate. At the time of interviews these certificates were taken into consideration. In para 23 of his affidavit, he has stated that the experience certificate was required to be annexed with the application form. No authority was nominated for issuing such certificate. At the time of interviews these certificates were taken into consideration. In paragraph 23 he has stated that all the selected candidates have been issued appointment letters and they have joined and are working. The respondent Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 10 have been wrongly shown with their wrong roll numbers. Their correct roll numbers have been given in paragraph-28 of the writ petition. 17. By the Government Order dated March 1, 2008 the post of Safai Karmis were created and that the appointees were to be the employees of the gram panchayats. By the Government Order dated April 11, 2008 the Safai Karmis has to be appointed vide sanction of posts by Government Order dated March 1, 2008 shall be full time government employees to work under the Panchayati Raj Department. As Government employees their appointments were to be made by a procedure provided under Group ‘D’ Employees Service Rules, 1985, to which the reservations were made applicable under the U.P. Reservation in Public Service, Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes Act, 1994, in which the posts could be filled up by general category candidates, other backward class castes and scheduled caste/scheduled tribe candidates according to the percentage of reservation provided under the reservation act. The Government Orders dated March 1, 2008; April 11, 2008 and June 6, 2008 did not provide for any reservation or preference or weightage to any particular caste or scheduled caste traditionally engaged in the work of sweeping and cleaning. The Group ‘D’ Employees Service Rule also does not provide for any such weightage or reservation. The submission, that the scheduled caste traditionally engaged in sweeping and cleaning work, were ignored and that most of the selected candidates were Ahirwar selected on the influence of local politicians, is not established on record. The District Panchayat Raj Officer has verified that 120 persons in Scheduled Caste category out of 159 belonged to ‘Balmiki’ caste, which is traditionally engaged in sweeping and cleaning work. 18. In the rejoinder affidavit the contents of the counter affidavit, that 120 persons belonging to Balmiki caste out of 159 scheduled caste candidates were selected, is not denied. The District Panchayat Raj Officer has verified that 120 persons in Scheduled Caste category out of 159 belonged to ‘Balmiki’ caste, which is traditionally engaged in sweeping and cleaning work. 18. In the rejoinder affidavit the contents of the counter affidavit, that 120 persons belonging to Balmiki caste out of 159 scheduled caste candidates were selected, is not denied. There is no foundation laid in the writ petition in proving the allegation of malafide or bias in the selections. The pleadings with regard to the role played by respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 in the selections is not substantiated by any positive assertion or material produced on record. 19. The selection of three children of one Shri Chaman Lal Babara and a husband and wife out of, 754 advertised posts does not appear to be so unreasonable so as to interfere in the selections. The possibility of selection of more than one member of a family on their own merits cannot be ruled out. If they were eligible to be considered for selections, their selections, unless there was any adverse material against them, cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary. 20. The petitioners have not been able to substantiate the facts and grounds taken in the writ petition to challenge the select list. 21. The writ petition is dismissed. ————