STATE OF U P Vs. ABDUL WASIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LIST revised. None present on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) THIS case has a chequered history. The selection process for Class III employees started with an advertisement of 13 vacancies to be filled up under the provisions of Rule 23 (8) of the U. P. Subordinate Officers Ministerial Staff (Direct Recruitment) Rules, 1985 as amended by the 1st Amendment Rules, 1986 (hereinafter called the Rules, 1986 ).

(3.) RESPONDENTS filed Writ Petition No. 28731 of 1993, challenging the said order cancelling the unexhausted wait list on the ground that as the select list was valid for a period of one year from the date of its commencement in existence and two vacancies had occurred during its lifetime, the vacancies ought to have been filled up from the said wait list, rather than inviting fresh applications by issuing fresh advertisement. The State respondent contested the writ petition on the ground that as per the Rules 1985 only names of 25 per cent of the total vacancies advertised could be placed in the wait list and in view of the fact that only 13 vacancies had been advertised, the wait list could have only 3 and not 5 names. Names of the present respondents could not have been included in the wait list.