Anand Singh v. State Of Rajasthan & Anr.

BY THE COURT:-

The controversy raised in the present petition is that reservation beyond 50% cannot be provided to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in a particular year.

2) Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of Supreme Court in M.R Balaji v. The State of Mysore {AIR 1963 SC 649}.

3) Controversy raised in this matter is squarely covered by two judgments of this Court in Smt. Sangeeta v. State of Rajasthan{SBCWP No. 2027/2002 decided on 6/2/2009} and Deepak Mathur v. State of Rajasthan{SBCWP No. 450/2002 decided on 29/1/2009} wherein, it was held that in view of The Constitution (Eighty-first Amendment) Act 2000 and sub-Article (4B) of Article 16 of the Constitution of India, the backlog vacancies would have to be treated as separate block for arriving at the ceiling of 50% in reservation.

In view of above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed.