AMIT NARESH BECK Vs. TENUGHAT VIDYUT NIGAM LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) These two cases involve same question of law and fact and, therefore, they are being disposed of together.

(3.) In one case, there is a panel of candidates, who appeared for selection pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Respondent-Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Limited (in short "T.V.N.L.") for recruitment. Such candidates, who appeared in the selection were empanelled but not appointed. The grievance of the Petitioners is that they were validly selected pursuant to a valid advertisement and had legitimate expectation to get appointed pursuant to the advertisement issued. The panel was prepared in the year, 2005 and till date they have not been appointed, though according to law, the panel expires within one year but the Courts have power to extend the currency of the panel, if the writ petition is filed prior to exhaustion of the panel and the writ petition was admittedly filed before the end of one year and, therefore, the right of the Petitioners to get appointed cannot be said to have been extinguished.