Candidates do not acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed against existing vacancies, and the employer is not bound to offer unfilled vacancies to candidates in the merit list.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner has challenged Advertisement Notice bearing No.04 of 2013 dated 28th June, 2013, issued by respondent No.2, where-under, inter alia, applications have been invited for filling up of 13 posts of Medical Record Technicians.

2. The case set up by the petitioner is that vide Advertisement Notice No.02 of 2011 dated 10th October, 2011, respondent No.2 invited applications from eligible candidates for filling up 13 posts of Medical Record Technicians, which included 07 posts in the open merit category. The petitioner being an in-service candidate and eligible in all respects applied for the said post. During the selection process, no shortlisting of the candidates was undertaken by the official respondents because the number of candidates who had applied was not very large. The official respondents issued final selection list vide Government Order No.123-SKIMS of 2012 dated 11th December, 2012, whereby 04 candidates were selected, though the number of vacancies advertised was 13 which included 07 vacancies in the open merit category.

3. It has been submitted by the petitioner that he filed representation against his non-inclusion in the selection list despite availability of the posts before respondent No.2 but the said representation was not considered. It has been submitted that out of in-service candidates, only respondents No.5 to 7 were selected and respondent No.8, who is not an in-service candidate, has also been selected in the open merit category. It has been further averred that out of in-service candidates, only 04 candidates were eligible in the open merit category but the official respondents appointed only respondents No.5 to 7 leaving out the petitioner who was the fourth eligible in-service candidate in the open merit category. It is submitted that during the pendency of the representation, respondent No.2 issued the impugned Advertisement Notice inviting applications for filling up of 13 posts of Medical Record Technician, which means that these posts are still available for selection.

4. On the basis of aforesaid factual background, the petitioner has contended that the official respondents have acted in complete disregard of the norms/rules governing the field. It has been submitted that the official respondents ought to have considered the candidature of the petitioner as he was eligible from amongst the in-service candidates. It has been further contended that by leaving out the petitioner from the list of selected candidates, the official respondents have acted in disregard of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It has been further contended that the impugned Advertisement Notice, in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, is a mala fide exercise of power on the part of official respondents. It has been prayed that besides quashing the impugned Advertisement Notice to the extent of filling up of posts of Medical Record Technician, the official respondents be directed to issue a formal order of appointment in favour of the petitioner, as has been done in the case of respondents No.5 to 8.

5. Reply to the writ petition has been filed by respondents No.1 to 4. In their reply, the said respondents have submitted that pursuant to Advertisement Notice No.02 of 2011 dated 10th October, 2011, 14 candidates including the petitioner responded for 07 posts under the open merit category and the Selection Committee interviewed all the 14 candidates without resorting to shortlisting. After undertaking the selection process, merit list was prepared and as per the said merit list, respondent No.5 obtained 67.69 marks, respondent No.6 obtained 63.88 marks, one Gazia Shaban Shah obtained 62.95 marks, one Manzoor Ahmad Bhat obtained 60.40 marks, respondent No.7 obtained 58.42 marks whereas respondent No.8 obtained 55.27 marks and they were on top of the merit list. The Selection Committee, besides recommending appointment of aforesaid 06 candidates, also recommended appointment of one Reya