JUDGMENT Surinder Singh, Judge (Oral) The present petition was pending in the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal. On its abolition, it was transferred to this Court and registered as Civil Writ Petition. 2.Heard and gone through the record. 3.The petitioners herein, are the diploma holder Junior Engineers (JE’s) of Electricity Department. They belong to the Scheduled Caste (S.C.) category. 4.Precisely, the petitioners seek the mandamus that they should have been considered to the post of Assistant Engineer (C/M) from the date, it fell due and not the subsequent dates of their promotion. 5.It shall not be out of place to mention here that earlier the petitioners had also filed OA (D) No. 1985/1991 against the respondent-Board.While disposing of the said OA, the learned Tribunal in para­25 in its judgment observed and held as under:- “25. Keeping in view the case law discussed above and the fact that on the basis of 15% reservation 7 posts were available to be filled up from amongst the Scheduled Caste Junior Engineers (Diploma Holders) to the post of Assistant Engineer, the act of respondents in ignoring the applicant falling under the zone of consideration is unjust, illegal and un-warranted. Out of 303, 201 posts of Assistant Engineers as per Annexure P-8 read with Annexure A-17 the Board cannot deny the right of consideration to the applicants while making promotion to the posts of Assistant Engineers on due dates (to be worked out) may be 19.1.1985 (A-3), 31.1.1988 (A-6) or 2.3.1990 (A-7) respectively. 26. The claim of the applicants right from beginning has been that 104 Junior Engineers from (C/M) had been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers (C/M) since 1981 on regular/adhoc basis, and only 4 junior engineers for Scheduled Caste and I Junior Engineer for Scheduled Tribe have been promoted leaving behind a back log of 12 and 7 posts respectively. The stand taken by the respondents that Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Junior Engineers are quite junior and do not fall within the extended zone of consideration is not accepted as correct because according to applicants the Junior Engineer from Scheduled Caste appearing at Sr. The stand taken by the respondents that Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Junior Engineers are quite junior and do not fall within the extended zone of consideration is not accepted as correct because according to applicants the Junior Engineer from Scheduled Caste appearing at Sr. No. 199, 200, 215, 217, 218 and 221 as per the latest seniority list of Junior Engineers, all within the extended zone of consideration (i.e. five times the numbers of vacancies) and should have been promoted against order dated 19.1.1 985, Annexure A-3 when 40 promotions have been ordered on regular basis. They were also not considered in the subsequent DPCs as is held on 31.8.1988 and 2.3.1990 as per Annexures A-6 and A-7, respectively.27.In view of the aforesaid discussion as the applicants did not fall under the zone of consideration, therefore, they should be considered for promotion. 28.In view of the aforesaid, this Original Application is allowed with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicants for promotion from the date they were actually due for promotion with consequential benefits.”(Emphasis supplied) 6.Since the respondent-Board did not comply with the aforesaid directions issued by the Tribunal, as such, Contempt Petition No. 4/2005 was filed in the Tribunal. In para-4 of the reply (Annexure A-13), on merits, the respondent submitted that as per the relevant instructions relating to reservations, 15% posts of AE (C/M) were to be reserved for the members of S.C. and 11 posts fell to the share of S.C. category. The applicants were alleged to be not in the zone of consideration in the DPC conducted by them, therefore, they were not considered. 7.Significantly, in the sur-rejoinder to the reply in the present petition filed by the respondent-Board, in para-1, it is averred that the total cadre strength falling to the share of Junior Engineer (C/M) Diploma Holder was 86, out of which, on the basis of 15% reservation available to the S.C. category, to which the petitioners belong, 13 posts were to be filled in from the candidates of S.C. category coming either in the normal zone of consideration or in the extended zone of consideration. Further in the same para, the respondent-Board also contended that keeping in view the instructions, the zone of consideration was restricted to 44, 22 and 62 posts for the years 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1984-85, respectively. Further in the same para, the respondent-Board also contended that keeping in view the instructions, the zone of consideration was restricted to 44, 22 and 62 posts for the years 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1984-85, respectively. Even by extending the zone to 5 times, the number of posts/vacancies to be filled during particular year, no S.C. candidate except Sh. Kashmiri Lal was available for promotion and further that the claim of the petitioners was not within the zone of consideration even after extending the zone to five times of the vacancies to be filled in at the relevant time. Further that the respondent-Board on 31 .8.1988, had filled in the vacancies for the post Assistant Engineer (C/M) on promotion on ad hoc basis on the basis of seniority list as it stood on 30.11 .1988, wherein 22 Diploma Holders were considered. Though, the posts were available to the share of S.C. Diploma Holder candidates, yet even by extending the zone to five times of posts/vacancies available, none of the candidates in the category of S.C. (Diploma Holders) was available. Thereafter, the respondent-Board again made promotion on 2.3.1990, wherein 17 vacancies fell to the share of Diploma Holders and at that stage also, no candidate was available from the said category. They also took up the stand that there were only two persons senior to the petitioners in the S.C. category who were also waiting for their turn for promotion against the percentage quota but since none of them fell in the normal/extended zone of consideration, therefore, they could not be promoted. 8.The Hand Book on Personnel Matters, Volume-II, page 537, clarifies that the principles for promotion to selection posts as contained in O.M. dated 16-3-1981 (sub-para (f) above) stood superseded, thus revised instructions were issued on 3/4-11-1981. These principles/instructions continue to be applicable in the State of Himachal Pradesh, even at present with the slight modifications and amplifications in particular situations as explained in its succeeding paras. These principles/instructions continue to be applicable in the State of Himachal Pradesh, even at present with the slight modifications and amplifications in particular situations as explained in its succeeding paras. According to these principles, the guidelines for promotion to selection posts are as follows: “(i) Zone of consideration for promotion to posts filled by Selection:(a) The Departmental Promotion Committee shall for the purpose of determining the number of officers who should be considered for promotion out of those eligible officers in the feeder grade(s) restrict the field of choice as under, with reference to the number of clear regular vacancies proposed to be filled in a calendar year: (i)The field of consideration will be three eligible persons for one post upto 20 posts; (ii) Above twenty posts one additional eligible persons for one additional post. Illustration No. of vacancies.No.ofeligible personsto be considered. 2060 2160+1 2260+2 2360+3 (b) Where, however, the number of eligible officers in feeder grade (s) is less than the required number, the officers so eligible should be considered.(ii) Zone of consideration for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe officers: (a) Where adequate number of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates are not available within the normal field of choice, the field of choice may be extended to five times the number of ‘vacancies and the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidate (and not any other) coming within the extended field of choice should also be considered against vacancies reserved for them subject to eligibility.(b) Those belonging to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes selected for promotion against vacancies reserved for them from within the extended field of choice under sub­para (a) above would, however, be placed enbloc below all the other officers selected from within the normal field of choice.” 9. Annexure A-5 dated 31 .1.1989 is a circular issued by the State Government for maintaining the rosters, which is also clarificatory to the extent that the question of maintaining rosters is with reference to over­all cadre strength of vacancies. 10. Thereservation forScheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes/Backward Classes/Ex­servicemen etc. has to be reckoned separately, category-wise and with reference to the over-all cadre strength of each category of posts. Thus percentage of reservation is to be allowed on the basis of rosters as already prescribed by the Government so long as the prescribed percentage within a cadre has not been reached. 10. Thereservation forScheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes/Backward Classes/Ex­servicemen etc. has to be reckoned separately, category-wise and with reference to the over-all cadre strength of each category of posts. Thus percentage of reservation is to be allowed on the basis of rosters as already prescribed by the Government so long as the prescribed percentage within a cadre has not been reached. Once, however, the prescribed percentage for a reserved category is achieved with reference to the over-all cadre strength, the operation of the roster for the said category will remain suspended. Till such time, the reservation to that category falls short of the prescribed percentage. 11. In the present case, as per the reply of the respondent-Board in the year 1985, 31st August, 1988 and 2nd March, 1988, 11 to 13 vacancies reserved for S.C. category for promotional cadre of Assistant Engineer (C/M) were available. Thus, as per the rosters, the petitioners had a right to be considered for the promotion from the date it fell due, with their own category and not with the general category. 12.In R.K. Sabharwal and others vs. State of Punjab and others AIR 1995 S.C. 1371 it has been held by the Apex Court that when a percentage of reservation is fixed in respect of a particular cadre and the roster indicates the reserve points, it has to be taken that the posts shown at the reserve points are to be filled from amongst the members of reserve categories and the candidates belonging to the general category are not entitled to be considered for the reserve posts. On the other hand the reserve category candidates can compete for the non reserved posts and in the event of their appointment to the said posts their number cannot be added and taken into consideration for working out the percentage of reservation. 13. Thus, the cadre strength is always measured by the number of posts comprising the cadre. The right to be considered for appointment can only be claimed in respect of a post in a cadre. As a consequence, the percentage of reservation has to be worked out in relation to the number of posts which form the cadre-strength.Thus, the concept of‘vacancy’ has no relevance in operating the percentage of reservation. The right to be considered for appointment can only be claimed in respect of a post in a cadre. As a consequence, the percentage of reservation has to be worked out in relation to the number of posts which form the cadre-strength.Thus, the concept of‘vacancy’ has no relevance in operating the percentage of reservation. 14.Further in P. Sheshadri versus Union of India and another, (1995) 3 S.C.C 552, the question before the Supreme Court was, whether the Scheduled Castes/Schedule Tribes candidates could have been considered alongwith the general candidates for promotional post. It was held that the reserved category aforesaid will be considered against the reserved category and will not be taken in the pool of the general candidates as per the Reservation Policy. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates in the combined list shall have to be considered to the select list of officers belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes prepared by the Departmental Promotion Committee, according to the availability of the vacancies and in their turn in the said list. This intention is also spelt out from clause (ii) of para 2.3.2 of OM dated 10.3.1989 which provides that promotion by selection against vacancies reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes will be made only from those Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe officers, who are within the normal zone of consideration. 1 5.The vacancy position with the respondents should be 13 instead of 11, as contended by them in their reply because Sh. Surjit Kumar and Jaishi Ram, Scheduled Caste candidates, were promoted on merit and seniority and not by giving benefit of reservation (Annexure A-1 1 dated 30.3.2002), which fact has not been denied by the respondents in their reply. Therefore, in view of the judgment referred in Ravinder Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others (2010) 5 S.C.C 136 of the Apex Court, such candidates, though belonging to S.C. category but selected against the vacancies in the general merit category shall be considered against the general category only. 16.Once the number of posts reserved for being filled by reserved category candidates in a cadre, category or grade (unit for application of rule of reservation) are filled by the operation of roster, the object of rule of reservation should be deemed to have been achieved and thereafter the roster cannot be followed except to the extent indicated in para-5 of R.K. Sabharwal’s case, aforesaid. While determining the said number, the candidates belonging to the reserved category but selected/promoted on their own merit (and not by virtue of rule of reservation) shall not be counted as reserved category candidates as also held in Union of India & others versus Virpal Singh Chauhan and others (1995) 6 S.C.C 684, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh and others vs. K.L.Narasimhan and another (1997) 6 S.C.C 283 and also in Rajesh Kumar Daria versus Rajasthan Public Service Commission & others (2007) 8 S.C.C, 785. 17.To sum up, if the number of S.C. candidates, who by their own merit, can be selected to general vacancies, class or even exceeds the percentage of reserved candidates, it cannot be said that the reservation quota in S.C. quota stands filled. The entire selection is in addition to the reservation against the general category. 18.On the basis of the above principles laid down by the Supreme Court, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Yash Pal Dhiman versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others, CWP (T) No. 4067/2008, decided on 23.12.2010, has also taken a similar view and I see no reason to hold otherwise. 18.Therefore, the aforesaid two candidates who were selected on their own merit are to be considered in the general category and not in the reserved category. Thus, these two posts are also available in the S.C. category, particularly in the roster of the Assistant Engineer (C/M) in addition to 11 such posts, as admitted by the respondents. 19.Thus, for the reasons stated above, in my opinion, the petitioners do fall in the zone of consideration with effect from the occurring of the vacancies in the year 1985, 31 .8.1988, 2nd March 1990 and also 30th March, 2002, whichever is available to the petitioners for their consideration to the post of Assistant Engineer (C/M). Therefore, the respondent-Board is hereby directed to hold a fresh DPC within a period of four months from the receipt of copy of this judgment and consider the petitioners for their promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (C/M) from the dates, aforesaid. Therefore, the respondent-Board is hereby directed to hold a fresh DPC within a period of four months from the receipt of copy of this judgment and consider the petitioners for their promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (C/M) from the dates, aforesaid. In case the petitioners are found fit to be promoted from the dates prior to their promotion in the year 2003, they shall also be entitled for the same with the consequential benefits arising therefrom and the due and admissible amount shall also be released to them flowing from it, within a period of three months, thereafter. 20.The learned Counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that petitioners No. 1 & 2 stand retired from their service. Therefore, it is also ordered that their pensionary benefits be also released accordingly from the date whichever is found beneficial to the petitioners. 21.With these directions/observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly, so also the pending application(s), if any.