Ashok Alias Somanna Gowda And Anr vs State Of Karnataka By Its Chief Secy. And ... on 11 October, 1991
5. By assailing the learned Single Judge's order, learned Senior Counsel contended that the learned Single Judge proceeded on the wrong footing by misconstruing the facts and in view of wrongful accommodation of one Mr.Munusamy, who was in Sl.No.20 in the 27th MBC/DC instead of 25th General turn and in all, three MBC/DC candidates have been appointed in the general vacancy of Maths, Commerce and Economics. Therefore, the next vacancy was filled by appointing the fourth respondent, who is also an MBC/DC. The learned senior counsel argued that once a candidate is part of roaster, importance must be given to merit, and that there cannot be any further reservation after the roaster was finalized and therefore the selection of the fourth respondent is untenable and is liable to be set aside. Referring to the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in ASHOK ALIAS SOMANNA GOWDA AND ANOTHER vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND OTHERS [(1992) 19 ATC 68] and of this Court rendered by one of us (N.P.V.,J) in the case of M.RAVI vs. TAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION (SALEM) LIMITED reported in (2008) 8 MLJ 670, the learned senior counsel contended that the appellant has secured more marks and hence supernumerary post ought to have been created.