SOHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) The appellants who were admittedly selected for the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) and Junior Engineer (Civil) had prayed for the issuance of a direction to the respondents for their appointment to the post to which they were selected but the petition filed by them was dismissed mainly on the ground that as the respondent-Board had abolished 27 posts of Assistant Engineer (Civil) and 93 posts of Junior Engineer (Civil), no direction as prayed for could be issued to it. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that in view of Annexures P/15 and P/16 filed with the review application submitted before the learned Single Judge, the contention of the respondents that some posts were abolished was without any basis.

(3.) It is conceded at the Bar that mere selection does not confer a right upon on a citizen to seek appointment. It has also been conceded that the selection once made cannot be brushed aside while making appointments. The only point for determination is as to whether the learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the petition in view of the averment of the Board that 27 posts of Assistant Engineer (Civil) and 93 posts of Junior Engineer (Civil) had been abolished. It may not be out of place to mention that respondents in their written statement filed in the writ petition had specifically stated:-