OM PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Om Parkash, through the present petition filed by him under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeks a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint him Lecturer in History (Male) in accordance with the selection of merit prepared by the Haryana Subordinate Services Selection Board, with all service benefits. He also seeks a restraint on the respondents for appointing any other fresh candidate either an ad hoc basis or otherwise as Lecturer in History (Male) without first absorbing him and meeting his claim in the regular capacity. The facts on which the relief aforesaid stems need a brief mention.

(2.) Haryana Subordinate Services Selection Board advertised the post of Lecturer in History (Male) vide advertisement dated 7th October, 1987, which appeared in various newspapers. The petitioner who was eligible and possessing all requisite qualifications applied for the post under contention in pursuance of the advertisement aforesaid. The Board constituted a selection committee before the petitioner appeared for interview. He was selected being a suitable candidate and was recommended by the Board to the Director of School Education, haryana. for regular appointment against a vacant post of Lecturer in History (Male). When even after having been recommended for appointment, he was not being appointed, he made repeated requests to the departmental authorities and he was assured that he will be given appointment in due course of time. When the assurances held out brought no tangible results, he made a written representation for appointment copy where of has been placed on the record of this petition as Annexure P2. meanwhile, the Government by memo dated 20th April, 1990, had extended the validity of the list of the recommendees made by the Board for a further period of six months with a view to give appointment to candidates so selected in a regular capacity. It is further pleaded that the petitioner could not be appointed against the post as some of the candidates appointed on ad hoc basis as Lecturer in History (Male) had obtained stay orders from this court. He further pleads that he was not given the appointment order even though a large number of posts are lying vacant.

(3.) The cause of the petitioner has been opposed by respondents No. 1 and 2 and the defence projected in the written statement is that in the year 1987 only ten posts of Lecturer in History for the General category were available in the department for which a requisition had been sent to the S.S.S. Board, Haryana; that in all, 16 selected candidates of General category were recommended for appointment; that in the meantime three more vacancies for the post of Lecturer in History for the general category became available and on the recommendation o the S.S.S. Board, Haryana, 13 selected candidates out of 16 in the general category in accordance with their merit have been given appointment. Inasmuch as the petitioner was at Merit No. 14, he could not be accommodated as no other vacancy in the general category became available in the department. In so far as fresh advertisement is concerned, it is pleaded thal eight vacancies in the general category became available in the department in August, 1990. As the petitioner was selected for the post in September, 1988, and the selection list was valid only for one year, there had to be afresh selection and the vacancies that became available after expiry of the earlier selection list could not be offered to the petitioner.