JUDGMENT Hon’ble A.P. Sahi, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel. 2. It is contended that under the relevant Government Order, reservation is provided only against one post in a village relating to the category of the Gram Pradhan of the village. There is no dispute with regard to that proposition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since there is only one Gram Pradhan therefore the reservation should be confined to only one post even if there are two schools with four posts in the institution. 4. The difficulty has arisen on account of the existence of two institutions in the village. 5. In my opinion, both the institutions are separate individual units having two posts each. The two institutions cannot be clubbed together for the purpose of extending the benefit of reservation as suggested, inasmuch as, the Government Order requires that in every institution one of the posts shall be offered to a candidate of a category of the Gram Pradhan. Since, there are two separate institutions therefore one post each in the institution has to be offered to the category of the Gram Pradhan, which is in consonance with the Government Order dated 10.10.2005 governing the provisions of reservation. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is not the intention of the Government Order to provide reservation in both the schools. The reservation so provided institution wise in my opinion would not exceed the percentage as provided for in the Government Order. 7. Accordingly, this argument is also not available to the petitioner. There is no merit in this writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed. ————