IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1734 of 2010
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9290 of 2009
======================================================
1. Avinash Kumar S/O Narmdeshwar Prasad R/O Vill& P.O.Idyapati
Nagar(Near N.C.C.Office), P.S.Saharsa & Distt-Saharsa
…. …. Appellant/s
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through Administrative Officer, Ordinance Depot
Telegaon Debhade Pune(Maharashtra)
2. Commandant, Ayudh Depot. Talegaon, Dhobude, Pune
3. Secretary, Defence , Ministry Of Defence New Delhi
…. …. Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Mukund, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sarvadeo Singh, CGC
======================================================
3 19-10-2011 Heard the parties and perused the order of the learned
single Judge whereby writ petition preferred by the appellant has
been dismissed.
We do not find any illegality in the order of the Writ
Court. The vacancies having been reduced, it is not possible to
direct for appointment of the appellant in absence of vacancy. The
leaned Writ Court has noticed that there was a stipulation in the
advertisement that vacancies may increase or decrease. In such
circumstances, it is not possible to grant relief to the appellant. The
appeal is dismissed.
The law on the issue is settled by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in several cases that inclusion of candidate’s name in the
Patna High Court LPA No.1734 of 2010 (3) dt.19-10-2011
2
merit list does not confer any right. One may refer to AIR 1991
SC 1612 (Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India).
So far as harassment to the appellant is concerned, the
Writ Court has observed that if so advised he may claim damages
through appropriate proceeding before the civil court. We are not
interfering with this observation.
(Shiva Kirti Singh, J)
(Shivaji Pandey, J)
sk