In Brief
A teacher participated in a recruitment examination for 33 positions. Although he ranked 34th on the merit list, he claimed appointment when one of the 33 selected candidates failed to appear for counselling, leaving a vacancy unfilled. The recruitment rules explicitly prohibited waiting lists and provided that unfilled posts must be carried forward to future recruitment. The Court held that absent a statutory provision for a waiting list, the lower-ranked candidate had no claim to the unfilled vacancy. Once the final selection list was published, the selection process was complete. The candidate's failure to appear was a post-selection event; the unfilled post must be carried forward as mandated by the rules, not filled from lower-ranked candidates. The appeal was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.