DHEERAJ KUMAR DUBEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VARIOUS posts were advertised in the year 1998 for an appointment of a Gram Vikas Adhikari. The petitioner applied and appeared in the written examination, in which he was successful and thereafter appeared in the interview before the District Committee. A select list was issued in which the petitioner was placed at serial No. 2 of the list of the waiting candidates. Out of 69 posts, 67 posts were filled up from the select list and by an order dated 7 -8 -2001, two persons from the wailing list, namely, Raghvendra Singh and Lal Chandra were appointed. The petitioner contended that by an order dated 28 -1 -2000, the Additional Commissioner Administration Rural Development, U.P. Lucknow had written a letter to all the District Development Officers in the State of U.P. to indicate the number of vacancies existing on the post of Gram Vikas Adhikari. Pursuant to the said letter, the District Development Officer, Gorakhpur by a letter dated 9 -2 -2000 intimated that twenty two posts were vacant in his region. The petitioner submitted that when two persons from the waiting list were appointed on 7 -8 -2001 and there existed twenty two vacancies, the petitioner should have also been appointed from the waiting list as he was placed at serial No. 2 in the waiting list. The petitioner contended that he made various representations to the authorities and, eventually, when no action was taken by the respondents, the petitioner approached this Court and filed the present writ petition praying that he should be appointed on the post of a Gram Panchayat Vikas Adhikari from the waiting list and that the same benefit should be given to him as given to the two persons who were earlier appointed by an order dated 7 -8 -2001.

(2.) THE respondents have filed a counter affidavit and have submitted that out of the 69 posts that were advertised, 67 posts were filled up from those candidates whose name were found in the select list and subsequently, the two vacant posts were filled up from the candidates in the waiting list. One candidate was taken from the General category from the waiting list and the second candidate was taken from the waiting list of the Scheduled Caste and in this manner, all the 69 posts so advertised, were duly filled up. The respondents submitted that since the petitioner was placed at serial No. 2 of the waiting list, he could not be appointed. It was further submitted that since the entire posts so advertised had been filled up, the waiting list came to an end and no further appointment could be made from the waiting list in the subsequent vacancy that came into existence.

(3.) HEARD Sri Niraj Tiwari, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.K. Rai, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.