Summary
The Supreme Court directed filling a reserved District Programme Officer vacancy from the 2012 merit list after the selected candidate resigned. Under the applicable instructions, the reserved point was not consumed by the original appointment and remained available. The next-ranked candidate had priority; the appellant, ranked third, would be considered if that candidate was uninterested. Appointment was required within two months, with seniority only from actual appointment.
Issues
- Whether resignation exhausted the reserved point and prevented recourse to the existing merit list.
- Whether the third-ranked appellant could displace the next-ranked candidate.
Provisions considered
- Relevant paragraph on reserved vacancies following resignation, Punjab Welfare Department instructions dated 10 January 1996A reserved point vacated through resignation or otherwise remained available and had to be filled from the selected candidates of the reserved community in merit order. (¶ 4)
Held
- Although a listed candidate has no vested right to appointment, the authority could not defeat the applicable instructions or the purpose of the list. A vacancy arising during its currency supported consideration of the next available candidate. (¶ 4)
- The relevant reserved slot remained vacant and had not been notified for the same community in the subsequent recruitment. It had to be filled from the earlier merit list. (¶ 4)
- The candidate ranked second had priority and had also made a representation. The appellant would receive consideration if that candidate was not interested; the Court did not direct unconditional appointment of the appellant. (¶ 4)
- Appointment from the merit list published on 20 June 2012 was directed within two months. The appointee would acquire seniority only from the date of appointment. (¶ 5)
Result
Appeal disposed of without costs. Reserved vacancy to be filled from the 20 June 2012 merit list within two months in merit order; seniority only from actual appointment.