ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, before this Court, was a candidate for the selection process to the post of Instructor, Government Industrial Training Institutes. His candidature was for the post of Instructor (Arts/Mathematics). Petitioner participated in the selection process and though his name did not figure in the select list of Schedule Caste candidates but his name figured in the select waiting list at serial no. 2 in the Schedule Caste category.

(2.) CASE of the petitioner is that the result was declared on 27.08.2010. Total number of post for the Instructor (Arts/Mathematics) were 106, out of which 23 posts were reserved for Scheduled Caste Category candidates, against these 23 posts, only 19 candidates have joined as Instructor in the Scheduled Caste Category and 04 posts were left vacant. The last offer given to the selected candidates was by way of an advertisement dated 16.12.2012 published in Amar Ujala Hindi daily newspaper, a fact which is admitted to the respondents. According to the petitioner, 04 posts of Schedule Caste Category still remained vacant. None of the selected candidates joined these posts. What should have followed therefore was that the offer should have been made the person placed at Serial No.1 in the waiting list of Scheduled Caste Category candidates and thereafter in case, he refuses to join, the offer should have been made to the petitioner, as he was no. 2 in the wait list. In any case, since 04 posts remained vacant in the category of Scheduled Caste and petitioner's name figured at serial no. 2 in the waiting list of the Schedule Caste candidates, he was liable to be given offer for appointment. Since this was not done, present petitioner made an application for appointment which was declined.

(3.) AGGRIEVED , petitioner filed writ petition being Writ Petition No.423 (SS) of 2013, which was disposed of vide order dated 23.04.2013 with the direction to respondent no.2 to take action in accordance with law on the select list prepared, as a consequence of this, his representation has been disposed of vide order dated 8th July, 2013 by which the appointment has been denied to the petitioner giving the reasoning that the select waiting list was declared on 27.08.2010 and the period of a waiting list is only one year, which has now been exhausted.