ORDER

Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, made on October 15, 1996 in CWP No. 12474/95.

3. The admitted facts are that in June 1980, there was a requisition in the Irrigation Department for filling up of four vacancies of Sub-Divisional Clerks. The Subordinate Service Selection Board advertised the posts. Instead of selecting four candidates, it prepared a list of 28 candidates in November 1982 and recommended them for appointment. Eight candidates including the respondent were recommended for appointment in Hathnikund Procurement Circle. The Superintendent Engineer wrote a letter to the Selection Board on November 5, 1982 stating that procurement Circle had not requisitioned for recruitment of any candidate and that he could not make any appointment; accordingly, he returned the request for appointment.

4. It would appear that the respondent has been making applications to various authorities from time to time but the same failed to bear any fruit. As a consequence, writ petition came to be filed in October 1996 seeking issuance of writ of mandamus for appointment to