The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus/prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents No.1 & 2 to appoint the petitioners against the posts of Lecturers (Hindi) in Government colleges on the basis of recommendations made by respondent No.3 with further direction to respondents No.1 & 2 not to make ad hoc or part-time appointments against the regular vacant posts of Lecturers in Hindi.

It is the case of the petitioners that their names appeared at Sr.Nos.54 & 55 in merit list of Lecturers in Hindi (College Cadre). It is further pleaded that the General Category candidates, up to Sr. No.51 in order of merit, had already been appointed and on account of availability of some more vacancies after the requisition was sent to the respondentCommission, candidates more than the advertised posts were selected in other subjects also and most of them had been given appointments from time to time.

CWP No.6906 of 1994

In the written statement filed by the respondents, it is contended that the candidates belonging to General Category up to Sr.No.51 were appointed whereas the name of petitioner No.1, Smt.Sunita was at Sr.No.54 and petitioner No.2 was at Sr.No.55 in the order of merit list belonging to General Category and there was no vacancy meant for General Category at that time against which the petitioners could be appointed and therefore, the waiting list could not be kept open for indefinite period and appointment could not be made from the list after the expiry of validity of the list on 28.05.1990. It is further pleaded that the waiting list of the candidates was revalidated up to 30.11.1990 and the candidates were appointed as per available vacancies at that time.

Nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioners. Writ petition was admitted on 25.10.1994 and no interim order had been passed. The petition has been rendered infructuous by sheer efflux of time. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous and for want of prosecution also.

11.05.2012 (G.S.Sandhawalia) sailesh JUDGE

Sunita and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief