DILIP KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF C. G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking appropriate writ / direction claiming that though he was listed in serial No.1 for the post of Assistant Workshop (Electrician) in select list prepared on 25/6/2011 and waiting list prepared on 25/6/2011 for 39 posts, but 15 selected persons have not joined and therefore, the petitioner was entitled to be considered, but respondent No.3 did not make appointment of the petitioner. Therefore, action being arbitrary, appropriate writ / direction be issued for his appointment. Reply has been filed supporting the action of respondent No.3.

(2.) Ms Diksha Gouraha, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that selection was made on 25/6/2011 for appointment of Assistant Workshop (Electrician), but select list was published on 25/6/2011 and appointments were also made on 25/6/2011, but only 24 persons were joined out of 39 posts advertised and 15 persons did not join and therefore, the petitioner has acquired a legal right to be appointed on the said post being candidate of wait list No.1. Therefore, appropriate writ / direction be issued against respondent No.3 to appoint the petitioner on the said post.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr.Animesh Tiwari, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents/State, would submit that though relevant rules does not specifically provide for the period for which the merit list shall remain valid, but ordinarily the vacancies have to be determined only once in a year. In absence of any rule, ordinary period of validity of select list should be one year. He would rely upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in the matters of State of Bihar and others v. Amrendra Kumar Mishra,(2006) 12 SCC 561 and State of Rajasthan and others v. Jagdish Chopra,(2007) 8 SCC 161 to support his submission.