JUDGMENT Justice Sanjay Karol, J. On 9.11.2011 the present petition was filed by petitioner Smt. Madhu Negi, inter alia, praying for the following reliefs:-“(A) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari quashing minutes of meeting of the Department Promotion Committee dated 31.10.2011 (Annexure–P5) held for consideration of eligible Office Manager (Junior) for promotion to the post of Office Manager (Senior) to the effect it has been recorded in the meeting that as regards Schedule Tribe Vacancy no suitable candidate was available during the intervening years in the zone of consideration, hence the post remains unfilled. (B) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent Corporation to convene a review Departmental Promotion Committee meeting for the DPC held on 31.10.2011 and consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Office Manager (Senior) against the roster point reserved for Schedule Tribe Candidate and thereafter promote her to the said post with all consequential benefits.” 2. On 14.11.2011 the Division Bench of this Court passed the following interim order: “Respondent to file reply within eight weeks. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that as of now, there is no proposal to demote the petitioner. If that be so, the present arrangement shall continue. In case, there is any proposal, appropriate clarification will be sought from the Court before implementing such proposal. Post after re-opening of winter vacations. Authenticated copy.” 3. The petition was admitted on 7.5.2012. Sh. Liaq Ram Kashyap was directed to be impleaded as party respondent in terms of orders dated 13.8.2012 and 21.8.2012. 4. On 16.8.2012 it was represented that this petition is to be heard along with CWP No. 6828 of 2010, titled as Madhu Negi vs. State of H.P. & others and CWP No. 1945 of 2010, titled as Musammim Ali vs. HPSFDC. Accordingly, on 16.8.2012 all petitions were directed to be listed together. Subsequently they were heard together. But however, on 19.9.2012 CWP No. 1945 of 2010 was directed to be delinked from the present petition and adjourned as it was found that the decision in the same or either of the other two petitions could have had no bearing on the outcome of any other petition. Subsequently they were heard together. But however, on 19.9.2012 CWP No. 1945 of 2010 was directed to be delinked from the present petition and adjourned as it was found that the decision in the same or either of the other two petitions could have had no bearing on the outcome of any other petition. Also on 19.9.2012 itself CWP No. 6828 of 2010 was permitted to be withdrawn as the instant petition was based on a different cause of action. As such, this petition was heard and judgment reserved on the said date itself. 5. Facts are not much in dispute. On 7.12.1979, petitioner Smt. Madhu Negi joined as a clerk with the respondent-Corporation. Her appointment was to a post reserved, as per roster, belonging to a scheduled tribe category candidate. On 9.11.1984 she was promoted as a Junior Assistant and on 6.5.1988 further promoted as Senior Assistant. On 13.5.1993 she was promoted as Office Manager (Junior). All of her promotions were on the basis of her birth mark. 6. The next higher promotional post is Office Manager (Senior) which undisputedly is a selection post. With effect from 7.7.2008, petitioner was promoted to the said post on ad hoc basis (Annexure P-2). Petitioner does not claim any right to the said post by virtue of this order of promotion. 7. The fact that petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Tribe category and her appointment is on her birth mark cannot be disputed. I need not refer to various documents placed on record to this effect. 8. The post of Office Manager (Senior) is required to be filed up in accordance with the Recruitment and Promotion Rules of Ministerial Establishment and the method and criteria for recruitment for the said post is as under:- S.No. Name of Post Scale of Pay Method of Recruitment In case of recruitment by promotion/ deputation, grade from which deputation/ promotion to be made. Minimum educational qualification required for direct recruitment Office Manager (Senior) Rs. 20003500 22004000 -Master Scale-7220 – 11660 By Promotion failing which by deputation or direct recruitment From amongst Office Manager (Jr.) in the pay scale of Rs. 1800 – 3200 (under Revision) 6400 – 10640 and in case of deputation from amongst Supdt. Grade_II in the scale of Rs. 2000 – 3500 with 3 years service in the grade both for promotion and deputation. Essential Qualification: 1. Graduate of a recognized university. 2. 1800 – 3200 (under Revision) 6400 – 10640 and in case of deputation from amongst Supdt. Grade_II in the scale of Rs. 2000 – 3500 with 3 years service in the grade both for promotion and deputation. Essential Qualification: 1. Graduate of a recognized university. 2. At least ten years experience in establishment/ accounts/ Sales/Stores, out of which five years must be in s Supervisory capacity. Desirable: 1. Knowledge of customs, manners and dialects of Himachal Pradesh. 2. Knowledge of Commercial accounts/ commercial laws. (Emphasis supplied) 9. Between the years 2006 – 2011, six posts of Office Managers (Senior) fell vacant. For some reason or the other they were not filled up. I need not go into this question, suffice it so say that it is a telling example of the manner in which the affairs of the Corporation are being managed. It is expected of the Corporation that all steps for filling up vacant posts, to improvise and increase efficiency, as also in the interest of its employees, must be taken at the earliest. 10. Be that as it may be, the fact of the matter is that for filling up these six posts, the Departmental Promotion Committee met on 31.10.2011 and made certain recommendations. Chart showing year of vacancy and the category to which these posts belong to is reproduced as under:- 11. It is not in dispute that these posts are to be filed up from amongst the Office Manager (Junior), on the basis of selection i.e. merit-cum-seniority. Undisputedly as on 31.10.2011, the day when proceedings of the Departmental Promotion Committee took place, both Smt. Madhu Negi and Sh. L. R. Kashyap were otherwise fully eligible. It is not in dispute that in the cadre of Office Manager (Junior), private respondent Sh. Liaq Ram Kashyap is much senior to petitioner Smt. Madhu Negi who is placed at Serial No. 33. 12. With regard to the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe category the Departmental Promotion Committee made the following observations:- “5. As regards ST vacancy at roster point 13 no suitable candidate was available during the intervening years also in the zone of consideration hence the same remained unfilled.” “5. As regards ST vacancy at roster point 13 no suitable candidate was available during the intervening years also in the zone of consideration hence the same remained unfilled.” 13. Sh. As regards ST vacancy at roster point 13 no suitable candidate was available during the intervening years also in the zone of consideration hence the same remained unfilled.” “5. As regards ST vacancy at roster point 13 no suitable candidate was available during the intervening years also in the zone of consideration hence the same remained unfilled.” 13. Sh. L. R. Kashyap being a candidate from the Scheduled Caste category was recommended to be promoted against the anticipated vacancies up to 31.12.2011. 14. In this background, petitioner Smt. Madhu Negi has assailed the action of the respondent-Corporation. 15. It cannot be disputed that if Smt. Madhu Negi is appointed as Office Manager (Senior) against the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe category, then Sh. L. R. Kashpap would never be promoted as Officer Manager (Senior) as he is to superannuate by the end of this year itself. 16. In the aforesaid factual backdrop Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the DPC erred in totally ignoring the case of the petitioner for the post in question. Such action is in violation of law laid down by the Apex Court in R. K. Sabharwal and others versus State of Punjab and others, (1995) 2 SCC 745 as also specific instructions dated 20.8.1998 (Annexure P-3), issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh itself. 17. On the other hand Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned counsel for the private respondent has argued that the post in question being a selection post is required to be filled up on the basis of merit-cum-seniority. Since his client is more meritorious and no error has been committed by the DPC, it is further urged that instructions issued in the year 1998 (Annexure P-3) are general in nature. In fact in the year 1981 itself, State issued instructions specifically dealing with the manner in which selection posts are required to be filled up. Hence specific instructions cannot be said to have been overruled/ repealed by any subsequent instructions issued in the year 1998, which in any event are of general nature. Also ratio of law laid down in R. K. Sabharwal (supra) is inapplicable to the instant facts. It is further urged that if roster is applied to the vacancy, the very concept of selection on the basis of merit would stand defeated. Also ratio of law laid down in R. K. Sabharwal (supra) is inapplicable to the instant facts. It is further urged that if roster is applied to the vacancy, the very concept of selection on the basis of merit would stand defeated. Myopic construction of the instructions issued by the Government in the year 1998 would result into mass supersession, bringing heart burning amongst the people in the same cadre. There is no specific challenge to the instructions issued by the Government in the year 1981. Also it cannot be construed that the said instructions stood repealed / overruled by any subsequent instructions. He has specifically relied upon instructions issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh dated 3/4 November, 1981, Notification No. Per (AP-II)-A(1)-1/80 as also Office Memorandums issued by the Government of India being O.M. No. 22011/3/76-Estt.(D), dated 24-12-1980, O.M. No. 36011/13/83-Estt. (SCT), dated 2-5-1983 and O.M. No. 22011/1/90-Estt.(D), dated 12-10-1990. 18. Additionally Mr. V. B. Verma, learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation has urged that the Apex Court in R. K. Sabharwal (supra) did not lay down the principle that even those candidates who do not fall within the zone of consideration, but otherwise belong to a reserved category, are necessarily required to be considered for the purposes of promotion to a select post. He has also relied upon the subsequent decision rendered by the Apex Court in Jagdish Prasad versus State of Rajasthan and others, (2011) 7 SCC 789 . 19. The Government of Himachal Pradesh has prepared a Handbook on Personnel Matters, Vol.-I (Second Edition). Chapter 16.1 stipulates that promotion is one of the modes of filling up a post. The advantage of promotion as a method is that the promoted person comes to the new job with some experience of the work and knowledge of the organisation and its ethos. On the other hand where specialized knowledge and qualifications involving academic or technical disciplines are concerned, promotions may not always be the best method since direct recruitment is more likely to make available persons wellversed in the latest advances and techniques. In many posts, the Rules for filling up the post may, as a working compromise, provide for both direct recruitment and promotion in a definite proportion so that there is a blend of experience with the fresh blood. In many posts, the Rules for filling up the post may, as a working compromise, provide for both direct recruitment and promotion in a definite proportion so that there is a blend of experience with the fresh blood. From a personnel management point of view, promotions provide incentives for the incumbents and help keep up morale and efficiency. 20. This chapter on Promotions covers various aspects, such as principles of promotion, working out number of vacancies, scrutiny of record of service by the Departmental Promotion Committee, time schedule for holding meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee and preparation of select lists, holding of meetings of the review Departmental Promotion Committee, cases where disciplinary criminal proceedings etc. are going on. Further this Chapter also lays down the criteria and procedure required to be followed, for filling up selection and non-selection posts. Clause 16.25 deals with the principles for promotion of candidates to selection posts. It provides for the number of eligible persons to be considered for the number of vacancies. 21. The Government of Himachal Pradesh issued circular dated 3/4 November, 1981, Notification No. Per (AP-II)-A(1)-1/80. The relevant portion of the said Notification, as relied upon by the respondents, is reproduced as under:- “In supersession of the Department of Personnel O.M., even number, dated 16th March, 1981, the undersigned is directed to say that the question relating to the principles for promotion to selection posts had been under the consideration of the Government for sometime past. The matter has further been examined and the Government have taken, the following decisions in this behalf. I. Zone of Consideration of Promotion to Posts filled by Selections. (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 filed 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 person for one additional post. (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. (c) Where adequate number of Scheduled Castes/Sch. (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. (c) Where adequate number of Scheduled Castes/Sch. Tribes candidates are not available within the normal field of choice as above 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. (d) Those belonging to Sch. Castes/Sch. Tribes selected for promotion against vacancies reserved for them from within the extended field of choice under sub-para (c) above would, however, be placed enbloc below all the other officers selected from with in the normal field of choice. Henceforth, the following procedure for assessing the over-all classification shall be followed in respect of selection posts to be filled up on the basis of merit-cum-seniority.” (Emphasis Supplied) 22. The Government of India has also issued O.M. No. 22011/3/76-Estt.(D), dated 24-12-1980, O.M. No. 36011/13/83-Estt. (SCT), dated 2-5-1983 and O.M. No. 22011/1/90-Estt.(D), dated 12-10-1990 laying down the principles for promotion to Selection posts. In the said circular, it is specifically provided that large field of choice might result in excessive supersessions, highlighting the fact there has been delay in filling up the vacancies resulting into vacancies being bunched. Resultantly the Government clarified that: “(i) For vacancies up to (and including) 10, existing provisions relating to normal size of zone of consideration will continue to be applicable; (ii) For vacancies exceeding 10, the normal size of zone of consideration will now be one and a half times the number of vacancies, rounded off to next higher integer, plus three but shall not be less than the size of zone of consideration for ten vacancies; (iii) The existing size of extended zone of consideration for SC/ST officers, viz., five times the total number of vacancies, will continue to be applicable.” 23. By the very same OM the Government laid down the criteria for consideration of the number of eligible candidates for the vacancies. Significantly for the posts belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes categories, the zone of consideration stood extended. By the very same OM the Government laid down the criteria for consideration of the number of eligible candidates for the vacancies. Significantly for the posts belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes categories, the zone of consideration stood extended. It stood clarified that where adequate number of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates were not available within the normal field of choice, the same be extended to five times the number of vacancies and only such candidate (and not any other) coming within the extended field of choice, should also be considered against such reserved vacancies. Also Officers belonging to such categories selected for promotion against reserved vacancies, out of the extended field of choice, would retain their position in the panel, in accordance with their gradation by the Departmental Promotion Committee. 24. Significantly none of the aforesaid instructions, as referred to and relied upon by the respondents, states that claims of eligible candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes category, are to be ignored even if they are otherwise eligible but are low in the seniority list of the feeding cadre. 25. Therefore the moot question to be considered is as to whether the zone of consideration for the post belonging to a reserved category is different and distinct from that of the candidates belonging to the general category or not. 26. The Apex Court in R. K. Sabharwal (supra)had an occasion to deal with an almost identical situation and question. A candidate belonging to a reserved category, who was otherwise low in the seniority list, was promoted against the post reserved for a Scheduled Caste category. He superseded 36 of his senior colleagues. This order of promotion was assailed by his seniors. Repelling the challenge, the Court in paragraph 4 of the report held 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 reserved posts. On the other hand candidate belonging to a reserve category can compete for the non-reserve 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. Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India, permits the State government to make any provision for reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any Backward Class of citizens, which in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the Services under the State. The Court held that it is incumbent on the State Government to see as to whether the Backward Class/Classes for which reservation is made are adequately represented in the State Services or not. While doing so, the State Government may take the total population of a particular Backward Class and its representation in the State Services. When the State Government, after doing necessary exercise makes reservation and provides the extent of percentage of posts to be reserved for the said backward Class, then the percentage has to be strictly followed. The prescribed percentage cannot be varied or changed simply because some of the members of the Backward Class have already been appointed/promoted against the general seats. The roster point which is reserved for a Backward Class has to be filled by way of appointment/promotion of the member of the said class. No general category candidate can be appointed against a slot in the roster which is reserved for the Backward Class. The fact that considerable number of members of a Backward Class stand appointed/promoted against the general seats in the State Services may be a relevant factor for the State Government to review the question of continuing reservation for the said class. But so long as instructions/rules providing certain percentage of reservations for the Backward Classes operate the same have to be followed. Further the Court specifically held that: “5. We see considerable force in the second contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The reservations provided under the impugned Government instructions are to be operated in accordance with the roster to be maintained in each Department. The roster is implemented in the form of running account from year to year. The purpose of “running account” is to make sure that the Scheduled Castes/Schedule Tribes and Backward Classes get their percentage of reserved posts. The reservations provided under the impugned Government instructions are to be operated in accordance with the roster to be maintained in each Department. The roster is implemented in the form of running account from year to year. The purpose of “running account” is to make sure that the Scheduled Castes/Schedule Tribes and Backward Classes get their percentage of reserved posts. The concept of “running account” in the impugned instructions has to be so interpreted that it does not result in excessive reservation. “16% of the posts …” are reserved for members of the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes. In a lot of 100 posts those falling at Serial Numbers 1, 7, 15, 22, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 65, 72, 80, 87 and 91 have been reserved and earmarked in the roster for the Scheduled Castes. Roster points 26 and 76 are reserved for the members of Backward Classes. It is thus obvious that when recruitment to a cadre starts then 14 posts earmarked in the roster are to be filled from amongst the members of the Scheduled castes. To illustrate, first post in a cadre must go to the Scheduled caste and thereafter the said class is entitled to 7th, 15th, 22nd and onwards up to 91st post. 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 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 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 vacancy whether permanent or temporary in a particular post the same has to be filled from amongst the category to which the post belonged in the roster. For example the Scheduled caste persons holding the posts at roster points 1, 7, 15 retire then these slots are to be filled from amongst the persons belonging to the Scheduled castes. Similarly, if the persons holding the post at points 8 to 14 or 23 to 29 retire then these slots are to be filled from among the general category. By following this procedure there shall neither be shortfall nor excess in the percentage of reservation.” “6. The expressions ‘posts’ and ‘vacancies’, often used in the executive instructions providing for reservations, are rather problematical. The word ‘post’ means an appointment, job, office or employment. A position to which a person is appointed. ‘Vacancy’ means an unoccupied post or office. The plain meaning of the two expressions make it clear that there must be a ‘post’ in existence to enable the ‘vacancy’ to occur. The cadre-strength is always measured by the number of posts comprising the cadre. 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. The concept of ‘vacancy’ has no relevance in operating the percentage of reservation.” ( Emphasis Supplied) 27. It is thus abundantly clear that reservation is to be applied to the post and not to the vacancy. As a consequence the percentage of reservation has to be worked out in relation to the number of posts which form the cadre-strength. The concept of ‘vacancy’ has no relevance in operating the percentage of reservation.” ( Emphasis Supplied) 27. It is thus abundantly clear that reservation is to be applied to the post and not to the vacancy. Vacancy based roster can operate only till such time representation of the persons belonging to the reserved categories, in a cadre, reaches the prescribed percentages of reservation. Thereafter, roster cannot operate and vacancies released by retirement, resignation, promotion etc. of the persons belonging to the general and the reserved categories are to be filled by appointment of persons from their respective categories, so as to maintain the prescribed percentage of reservation. 28. Significantly for implementing these directions, the Government of Himachal Pradesh issued specific instructions dated 20.8.1998 (Annexure P-3) clarifying that the roster is to be operated on the principle of replacement and not as a “running account” as was so done hitherto. It stood specifically mentioned that the points at which reservation for different categories applies, are fixed as per the roster and vacancies caused by retirement of persons occupying those points, shall be filled up by appointment of persons of the respective categories. Clause 12 of these instructions provides that: “In the case of small cadres (upto 13 posts), all the posts shall be earmarked on the same pattern as in the model post based rosters. Initial recruitment against these posts shall be by the category for which the post is earmarked. Replacement of incumbents of posts shall be by rotation as shown horizontally against the cadre strength as applicable. While operating the relevant roster, care will have to be taken to ensure that on no occasion the percentage of reserved category candidates exceed 50%. If such a situation occurs at any time, the relevant reserved point occurring as a result of rotation will be skipped.” 29. Also these instructions lay down model, roster for promotion to cadre strength up to 13 posts, which is reproduced as under:- 30. Most significantly in the very same instructions it was clarified that “the existing orders on the subject are deemed to have been amended to the extent herein”. (Emphasis supplied) 31. Also these instructions lay down model, roster for promotion to cadre strength up to 13 posts, which is reproduced as under:- 30. Most significantly in the very same instructions it was clarified that “the existing orders on the subject are deemed to have been amended to the extent herein”. (Emphasis supplied) 31. Thus, I am of the considered view that the members of the Departmental Promotion Committee seriously erred in ignoring the petitioners claim. Two posts belonging to a reserved category had fallen vacant in the year 2006. One of a Scheduled Caste and another of a Scheduled Tribe. Prior to the same, the roster stood exhausted. The post belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in R. K. Sabharwal (supra), as also specific instructions issued by the Government in the year 1998, had to be filled up only by a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category. In the year 2006, petitioner Smt. Madhu Negi was eligible for consideration, as she had completed her normal tenure of three years as Office Manager (Junior) in her cadre. 32. The members of the Departmental Promotion Committee seriously erred in wrongly applying the roster and taking out the post reserved for a Scheduled Tribe category to be filled up by a candidate belonging to a general category. Members erred in coming to the conclusion that at roster point 13 no suitable candidate was available during the intervening years as also none was available within the zone of consideration. Undisputedly the cadre for the post in question consists of seven posts. As per the model roster for promotion, for cadre strength upto 13 posts, the seventh post which undisputedly fell vacant in the year 2006, was to go to the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category. Reservation has to be on the basis of post and not vacancy. 33. At this juncture it may also be noticed that the Government of Himachal Pradesh issued letter No. Per (Apptt. II) –F(4) 10/74, dated 5th November, 1976, specifically dealing with the subject of reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates for promotions to a select post. The extent of zone of consideration is specifically prescribed therein. 33. At this juncture it may also be noticed that the Government of Himachal Pradesh issued letter No. Per (Apptt. II) –F(4) 10/74, dated 5th November, 1976, specifically dealing with the subject of reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates for promotions to a select post. The extent of zone of consideration is specifically prescribed therein. It categorically provided that selection against vacancies reserved for a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates in promotions, is to be made only from amongst the candidates of such categories who are within the normal zone of consideration. It was noticed that enough number of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates were normally not available. To meet with this peculiar situation, Government decided that in cases where sufficient number of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates do not fall within the normal zone of consideration, a separate list of such candidates, extending to five times the number of posts reserved for them, be prepared from amongst the eligible candidates belonging to such reserved categories, in accordance with the general principle laid down for selection posts. 34. In my considered view instructions issued by the Government on 3/4 November, 1981 are general in nature and do not specifically deal with the promotions for the posts of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates. On the contrary, instructions issued by the Government on 20.8.1998 (Annexure P-3), which by a deeming provision amend anything to the contrary, and Office Memorandum dated 5th November, 1976 {Handbook on Personnel Matters Vol-II (Second Edition) Page-544} specifically deal with the subject of promotion of a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates. The contentions of the learned counsel for the respondents is thus not tenable in law. 35. Significantly there are no instructions on the lines of the instructions issued in the year 1981 after passing of the judgments either in the case of R. K. Sabharwal (supra) or Ajit Singh (II) (supra). 36. The contentions of the learned counsel for the respondents is thus not tenable in law. 35. Significantly there are no instructions on the lines of the instructions issued in the year 1981 after passing of the judgments either in the case of R. K. Sabharwal (supra) or Ajit Singh (II) (supra). 36. It is true that strict implementation of instructions issued by the Government, in compliance of the principles of law laid down by the Apex Court in R. K. Sabharwal (supra) may result into mass supersession, bring heart burning, amongst the people of the same cadre but then one cannot loose sight of the fact that the Apex Court in Ajit Singh and others (II) versus State of Punjab and others, (1999) 7 SCC 209 has upheld the catch-up principle by holding that it would properly balance the rights of the candidates belonging to the reserved category vis-à-vis the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 16 of the Constitution of India of the candidates belonging to the general category. Yes, by applying the said principle private respondent would never be promoted. But then, none can have any quarrel with fate and destiny. 37. In P. Sheshadri versus Union of India and another, (1995) 3 SCC 552 the Apex Court, while interpreting O.M. dated 27.11.1972 stipulating a condition that ‘this combined select list should therefore be followed for making promotions in vacancies as and when they arise during the year’, held that separate list of officers of general category and candidates belong to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is to be prepared and merged to form a combined select list of all the selected candidates. 38. Reliance on the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Jagdish Prasad (supra) does not in any manner advance the case of the respondents. It simply states that posts are to be filled up in accordance with the Rules and nothing more than that. In fact, Apex Court has deprecated the practice of non- compliance of Rules by the members of the Departmental Promotion Committee. 39. In view of the aforesaid, the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the respondents are rejected. 40. The post in question undoubtedly is a selection post and petitioner’s merit has to be assessed by the DPC. But unfortunately that was not so done. The Committee erred in not even considering her name. 41. 39. In view of the aforesaid, the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the respondents are rejected. 40. The post in question undoubtedly is a selection post and petitioner’s merit has to be assessed by the DPC. But unfortunately that was not so done. The Committee erred in not even considering her name. 41. Hence in my considered view, petition needs to be allowed. The impugned minutes of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 31.10.2011 (Annexure P-5) are quashed insofar as they relate to the petitioner and the post reserved for a Scheduled Tribe category. For the said post, respondent-Corporation is directed to convene a Review Departmental Promotion Committee meeting and consider the case of Smt. Madhu Negi for the post specifically reserved for the Scheduled Tribe candidate. While doing so, respondents shall consider all available candidates who are otherwise eligible from the said category. Also if any one of the candidates, belonging to the reserved category, is so found meritorious and is selected, then inter se seniority amongst the candidates selected for the posts considered by the DPC, shall also be determined and final list of seniority prepared accordingly. All consequential actions shall follow. 42. Decision in this regard shall positively be taken within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment. No order as to costs. With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.