The select list exhausts itself once the necessary appointments are made, and wait listed candidates have no legal right to be appointed against future vacancies.

Valmiki J. Mehta, J.

1. By this writ petition, the petitioner who is a retired Judge of the Allahabad High Court (who was also subsequently appointed as Chairman of the Railway Claims Tribunal), seeks the relief for being appointed as a Member (Judicial) of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on the ground that his name appears at serial no.5 in the select list of candidates who were to be appointed.

2. I may at the outset itself note that even as per para 2.8 of the writ petition, the select list of five candidates of which petitioner was placed at serial no.5 was with respect to two vacancies of Member (Judicial) in NCDRC pursuant to the notification dated 21.7.2011.

3. The case of the petitioner is that out of five candidates in the select list, the first two candidates, namely, Justice J. M. Malik (Retd.) and Justice K.S. Chaudhary (Retd.) joined. As per the petitioner, against a subsequent vacancy, Justice Ajit Bharihoke (a retired Judge of this Court) was asked to join inasmuch as the third person in the select list did not accept the offer of appointment. Petitioner claims that validity of the panel is one year in terms of the subject notification dated 21.7.2011 and para 8 whereof categorically states that the vacancy arising during the validity period of the panel may be filled from among the panel. This para 8 reads as under:-

“8. The panel of appointment recommended by the Selection Committee will be valid for a period of one year from the date of the final meeting of the Committee. Any vacancy arising during the validity period may be filled from among the panel.”

4. The select list in this case was prepared as per the selection committee meeting held on 13.2.2012 and petitioner claims that this panel was operative till 13.2.2013 by virtue of aforesaid clause 8 and in this period Justice R.C. Jain (Retd.) who was a Member (Judicial) in NCDRC retired in December, 2012 and therefore petitioner has an entitlement to be appointed. Petitioner claims that petitioner was asked for his consent for appointment by the letter dated 24.8.2012 after the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) recommended his name, and the petitioner gave his consent for appointment vide letter dated 27.8.2012. Petitioner impugns the communication issued to him on 10.7.2013 stating that the petitioner cannot be appointed as a Member (Judicial) in NCDRC as a decision has been taken to advertise the vacancy which has arisen on the term of Justice R.C. Jain (Retd.) coming to an end.

5. Before proceeding further, at this stage, I would seek to refer to the relevant paras of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Maninder Kaur Vs. Delhi High Court and Ors. (1995) 57 DLT 288 (FB), and which paras hold that a select list/panel exhausts itself once the requisite number of people who are asked to join, join their posts. The Full Bench of this Court relied upon various judgments of the Supreme Court and which held that a person in the waiting list has no right to be appointed on a future vacancy (which arises subsequently) once the panel/select list exhausts itself on the necessary number of persons joining. The relevant paras of Maninder Kaur’s case read as under:-

“36. The office memorandum dated 8th February 1982 is Annexure P.4 to the writ petition of Malkhan Singh. The said memorandum has also been reproduced in the decision of the Supreme Court in Prem Parkash's case. A perusal of the said memorandum shows that it is applicable in a case where a person is declared successful according to merit list of selected candidates which is based on the declared number of vacancies. The responsibility vests on the appointing authority to appoint such a person even if number of vacancies undergo a change after his name has been included in the list of selected candidates. It is thus evident that if a candidate has not been selected against the declared number of vacancies no right flows to him on the basis of the