2005 Supreme(All) 1140
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
V.M. Sahai and Sabhajeet Yadav, JJ.
Arun Kumar Singh son of Sri Shambhu Narain Singh
Versus
State of U.P. through the Chief Secretary, U.P. Government, Secretary, Higher
Civil Misc. Writ Petition 3447 of 2002
Decided On : 08 July 2005
Civil Misc. Writ Petition 3447 Of 2002
B.N.Singh, M.A.QADIR, S.K.Singh,
Headnote:
The petitioner, a general category candidate, was placed at serial no. 2 in the waiting list for the post of Assistant Registrar. Two general category candidates resigned from their posts within a year of joining, resulting in two vacancies. The petitioner sought a direction to the Public Service Commission to recommend his name for appointment against one of the vacancies. The Commission declined, citing the expiry of the waiting list's validity period and a government order prohibiting the filling of vacancies arising from resignations with wait-listed candidates.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a general category candidate, was placed at serial no. 2 in the waiting list for the post of Assistant Registrar. Two general category candidates resigned from their posts within a year of joining, resulting in two vacancies. The petitioner sought a direction to the Public Service Commission to recommend his name for appointment against one of the vacancies.
Finding of the Court:
The Commission declined, citing the expiry of the waiting list's validity period and a government order prohibiting the filling of vacancies arising from resignations with wait-listed candidates.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to be appointed against one of the vacancies caused by the resignation of the two general category candidates.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to be appointed against the vacancies. The court reasoned that the waiting list had expired, and a government order prohibited the filling of vacancies arising from resignations with wait-listed candidates.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition.
( 2 ) THE brief facts having material bearing to the controversy involved in the case are that on 5. 8. 1996 an advertisement no. A-l/e-1 96-97 was published by the Commission in daily newspapers for holding selection against 11 vacancies on the post of Assistant Registrar in U. P. State Universities (Centralised) Services. Out of the aforesaid 11 vacancies, 6 vacancies were earmarked as unreserved for candidates of general category, 3 vacancies were reserved for other backward class candidates and 2 vacancies were reserved for the candidates belonging to S. C. and s. T. Subsequently thereafter aforesaid vacancies were increased from 11 to 19. The petitioner being fully eligible and qualified, applied for the selection and pursuance thereof, he was permitted to appear in written examination. The petitioner was declared successful in written examination and was called for interview which was held on 29. 9. 1997. After the interview, the result of aforesaid selection was declared on 30. 9. 1997 in which total 19 candidates were declared successful. The name of the petitioner did not find place in the main select list. But he was placed at serial no. 2 in the waiting list of the candidates belonging to the general category. The names of selected candidates were commended and forwarded by the Commission to the state Government for appointment and the letters of appointment have been issued to the selected candidates by the State Government on 30. 12. 1997. The petitioner came to know that 2 candidates of general category, namely Kamlesh Kumar Shukla and Anand Kumar had resigned from service within one year of their selection and appointment on 5. 9. 1998 and 2. 12. 1998 respectively as a result of which 2 vacancies on the said post have occurred. Since the aforesaid vacancies arose out of resignations of candidates belonging to the general category, the petitioner, being a general category candidate at serial no. 2 in the waiting list, was entitled to be recommended by the Commission and the State Government was under legal obligation to ask the Commission to send the name of the petitioner for appointment and further to issue letter of appointment to the petitioner on the basis of his placement at serial no. 2 in the waiting list amongst the candidates belonging to the general category. The petitioner moved several representations to the authorities concerned for his appointment against one of the aforesaid two vacancies. It is also alleged that the person placed at serial no. 1 of the waiting list of general category, namely Sri R