The appointing authority must act promptly and within a reasonable time frame upon a selected candidate not accepting the offer of appointment.

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J.

1. Petitioner assails the action of the respondent/Agriculture Department, State of Haryana in having declined to her appointment to the post of Agriculture Development Officer.

2. In the year 2009, the Haryana Staff Selection Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Commission') issued advertisement inviting applications for recruitment to 267 posts of Agriculture Development Officers under the Department of Agriculture, State of Haryana. 115 posts were to be filled up from amongst general category candidates. Petitioner who was eligible in terms of eligibility conditions contained in the advertisement, applied for the post as a general category candidate and subjected herself to a process of selection. The Commission declared the final result on 16.07.2012. The Commission submitted its recommendations to the State Government containing names of 115 candidates belonging to the general category candidates and in addition thereto, 11 other candidates were also declared as successful but their names figured in a waiting list and in which name of the petitioner found mention at Sr. No.6.

3. The entire case set up on behalf of the petitioner is that the candidature of 8 candidates, selected and recommended for appointment as Agriculture Development Officer from amongst the 115 belonging to the general category has been cancelled and yet the petitioner who was at Sr. No.6 in the waiting list has been denied appointment. A plea of discrimination has also been raised by contending that as opposed to the candidature of 8 candidates having been cancelled, the waiting list has been operated only to offer appointment letters to the first three candidates from the waiting list whereas the others including the petitioner have been denied such benefit. It has also been contended that 5 posts of Agriculture Development Officers against the general category are still lying vacant and yet the State Government is adamant in not issuing appointment letter to the petitioner and such action is arbitrary, illegal as also violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the recommendations from the Commission were received vide letter dated 23.07.2012. As per Government Instructions dated 20.01.1988, the validity period of such list including that of waiting list is one year from the date of issuance of the letter. Learned State counsel contends that the waiting list pertaining to the general category candidates for appointment to the post of Agriculture Development Officer and in which name of the petitioner was at Sr. No.6 expired on 22.07.2013. It is further sought to be justified that prior to 22.07.2013, offers of appointment of three candidates had been cancelled, namely, Gurmej Singh, Vinod and Gajender Singh and accordingly, the waiting list was operated during the period of its validity and candidates at Sr.Nos.1, 2 and 3 in the waiting list were issued appointment letters. It has also been argued on behalf of the State that a waiting/panel list is merely a list of candidates found suitable and the same does not clothe such candidate with any in-defeasible right of appointment. It has been contended that the recommendations of the respondent/Commission were merely directory in nature and were therefore not enforceable by way of issuance of a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India so as to accept the prayer of the petitioner seeking appointment to the post in question.

5. Counsel for the parties have been heard at length and the pleadings on record have been perused.

6. The short issue that arises for consideration in the present case is as to whether there has been any arbitrariness in State action?

7. State Government had issued Instructions vide memo dated 20.01.1988 on the subject of appointment of candidates out of the waiting list prepared by the Recruiting Agency. In terms thereof, the main list as well a