In Brief
The appellant, ranked third on a 2012 merit list for District Programme Officer (reserved for Balmiki/Majbhi Sikhs), sought appointment after the originally appointed officer resigned in 2014. The State refused, treating the reserved vacancy as consumed. The Court held that under the 1980 and 1996 welfare department instructions, a reserved vacancy vacated by resignation must be filled from the existing merit list in order of seniority—not re-advertised. The appointing authority has no discretion. Since the vacancy arose before the fresh selection commenced and the slot remained available, the appellant had a legitimate expectation to appointment. The appeal was allowed with directions to appoint within two months.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.