JUDGMENT
R. K. Patra, ACJ
1. In this writ petition the petitioner prays for a direction to the opposite parties to appoint him against the vacant post or junior clerk under the judgeship of the District Judge, Koraput.
2. Briefly stated, his case is that the District Judge, Koraput, Jeypore made an advertisement dated 14.8.1992 inviting applications from eligible candidates for filling up of posts of Junior Clerk. Persuant to the said advertisement, he applied, qualified himself in the written test and thereafter appeared in the viva-voce test. He became successful and his position was at serial no. 52 of the panel list published on 13.10.1992 at Annexure – 4. One Pradeep Kumar Bal filed a writ petition bearing O.J.C.No 2466 of 1995 alleging that although his position in the panel list was at 25the, instead of appointing him the District Judge was going ahead to recruit fresh candidates. By order dated 10.8.1995 this Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction that “no fresh general candidate will be appointed to the post of Junior Clerk till to present list of October, 1993 is exhausted “and” the order given in the list will be followed while issuing appointment orders.” As he (Petitioner of O.J.C.No. 2466/1995 ) was not appointed, he again moved this Court in Misc. Case No. 3767 of 1997 for issuance of appropriate direction. This Court by order dated 16.7.1997 disposed of the said misc.case with a direction that the next vacancy would go to him because the candidate occupying 34th position in the list had been given appointment.
3. Basing on the Judgment dated 14.11.1996 in another case (OJC No. 632 of 1996) Registrar of this Court issued instructions to all the District and Sessions Judges stating that no appointment shall be made from the waiting list prepared
and if necessary fresh list be prepared by the District Judge in accordance with law. Later the Registrar modified the aforesaid letter on 9.9.1998 stating as follows :
“… With reference to the above subject I am directed to say that the Circular stands modified to the extent that in the event there is any judicial order regarding appointment from select list or extending the period of select list by any judicial order, it shall be strictly adhered to ..”
The allegation of the petitioner is that despite the aforesaid circular clarifying the position, the District Judge is not appointing him although he made several representations in this regard to him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the specific and clear direction of this Court made by order dated 10.8.1995 in O.J.C. No.2466 of 1995 to the effect that no fresh general candidate will be appointed in the post of junior Clerk till the present list of October, 1993 is exhausted, the petitioner ought to be given appointment. Her submission is that the said order is binding till it is reversed and that is the reason why the Registrar in his letter dated 9.9.1998 clarified the position stating that the select list should be adhered to .
5. We have duly considered the submission made on behalf of the petitioner and the opposite parties. In view of the direction referred to above, there is substance in the petitioner’s submission. Accordingly, we direct the District and Sessions Judge, Koraput, Joypore(Opp.party no.2) to appoint the petitioner as Junior Clerk, if there is vacancy. This may be done within a month of receipt of this order.
6. The writ petition is allowed.
B.R. Das, J.
7. I agree.
8. Writ petition allowed.