JUDGMENT :

B.R. SARANGI, J.

The petitioner has filed this application seeking for direction to the opposite parties no.1 to 3 to give him appointment in the post of Steno-cum-Typist in Indane Bottling Plant at Balasore pursuant to the select list dated 14.07.1993 (Annexure-4) and to quash the requisition dated 19.07.1995 (Annexure-6) made by the Deputy General Manager-opposite party no.2, for and on behalf of Indian Oil Corporation, to the Employment Officer, District Employment Exchange, Balasore calling for the names of suitable qualified candidates to fill up the posts of Steno-Typist at Balasore Bottling Plant.

2. The factual matrix of the case is that Indian Oil Corporation is a Government of India undertaking, of which Indane Bottling Plant at Balasore is one of its units dealing with marketing division. The petitioner, being a Graduate in Arts and having completed the course of shorthand and typewriting and also experienced in electronic typewriting and word processing in personal computer, registered his name in the District Employment Exchange, Balasore to consider his case for suitable appointment in different organizations. Marketing Division of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. issued a requisition vide Annexure-1 dated 10.03.1993 to the Employment Officer, District Employment Exchange, Balasore to send a list of 40 suitable General and Scheduled Caste candidates, having requisite qualification and experience as indicated in Annexure-1, by 25.03.1993 for appointment of Steno-Typist. On receipt of the same, on 30.04.1993, the District Employment Officer, Balasore submitted a list of 40 suitable candidates, having requisite qualification, for test and interview for the post of Steno-Typist. In the said list, the petitioner’s name was also sponsored by the Employment Officer and his name was found place at serial no.11. After receipt of the said list of names, the petitioner was issued with call letter to attend the test on 07.06.1993 for test/personal interview. The petitioner along with other candidates appeared on the date fixed and on verification of records and testimonials, the typing and stenography tests were held and lastly personal interview was conducted by the selection committee on the very same day. Finally, opposite party no.1 communicated to the Employment Officer-opposite party no.4 that out of candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange, the present petitioner was found suitable for appointment by the Corporation on the basis of his interview test and performance and he was kept reserved for future vacancy as per the communication dated 14.07.1993. Thereafter, a requisition was received by the Employment Exchange Officer on 19.07.1995 for filling up of the vacancy of Steno-Typist. As the petitioner’s name was empanelled for future vacancy, it is stated that without filling up of the vacancy pursuant to the selection already made, the authority could not have issued a fresh requisition for filling up the very same vacancy.

3. Mr. J.K. Khuntia, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously urged that pursuant to requisition made by opposite party no.1 when the name of the petitioner was sponsored and his name was indicated in the select list with a condition that in the event any vacancy would arise in future, the same would be filled up by the petitioner, the subsequent requisition made vide Annexure-6 dated 19.07.1995 cannot sustain. It is stated that having adjudged the merits of the petitioner and kept in waiting list, opposite party no.1 could not have gone for a fresh requisition.

4. Mr. N.C. Sahoo, learned counsel appearing for opposite parties no.1 to 3 strenuously urged that even though the petitioner’s name appeared in the waiting list, the validity of the said list having been expired, he cannot claim as a matter of right to get the appointment after expiry of the merit list and, as such, no right has been accrued in favour of the petitioner to get appointment because his name was found place in t