http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SRI SANJOY BHATTACHARJEE

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       10/03/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Delay condoned.      This special  leave petition  has been filed against an order of  the Central  Administrative Tribunal, made on July 8, 1996 made in O.A No. 879/93.      Admittedly, the  petitioner, having acquired Diploma in Engineering,  had   applied  for   and  stood   selected  as Technician. The  vacancies notified were 480. His ranking on merit is  779. Since  he was  not appointed  to the post, he filed the  D.A in  the Tribunal. It was contended that while he was  looking for  ward to  his appointment  in accordance with the  selection, instead  of making  the appointment the authorities issued  notification for fresh recruitment, thus , defeating the right of the petitioner and others similarly situated. Therefore, direction to the respondent authorities to appoint  him, as  per his  ranking in the select list for the year 1989 was sought. stay of fresh recruitment till the said list  got exhausted,  was also sought. The Tribunal has dismissed the petition holding that mere putting a candidate in the  select list  does not  confer on  him any  right  to appointment. Selection  was made  only for  filling  up  480 vacancies; after  the absorption   thereof, selection has to be made  for the  subsequent vacancies  from the open market and,. therefore,  directions sought  could not  be given. We find that the reasons given . We find that the reasons given by the  Tribunal are  well  justified.  Merely  because  the petitioner has been put in the waiting list, he does not get any vested  right to an appointment. It is not his case that any one  below his  ranking in  the waiting  list  has  been appointed which could give him cause for grievance. Thus, he cannot seek any direction for his appointment.      For subsequent  vacancies, every one in the open market is entitled  to apply for consideration of his/her  claim on merit in accordance with law and it would be consistent with the provisions of Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution. Therefore, direction sought for not to fill up the vacancies having arisen  subsequently  until  the  candidates  in  the waiting list  are exhausted, cannot be granted. The Tribunal rightly refused to grant any such direction.      The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2