JUDGMENT
Manju Goel, J.
1. The petitioner responded to an advertisement in the Employment News dated 11-17.10.2003 for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer (Civil) in respondent No. 4-National Physical Laboratory, New Delhi (in short `NPL’). The petitioner fulfillled the eligibility criteria. He received a letter dated 6.4.2004 from the NPL asking him to appear before a Selection Committee on 28.4.2004. After the interview the petitioner received a letter dated 14.9.2004 from the Central Road Research Institute (in short `CRRI’) informing that he was being considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer Group -III(4) with a copy of the letter of the same date addressed to Chairman, Standing Medical Board, Lady Harding Medical College & Hospital requesting them to make arrangement for medical examination of the petitioner. The petitioner thereafter submitted the attestation form and character certificate duly filled on 22.9.2004. The counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner left for Dubai on 1.10.2004 and returned to India on 2.11.2004 as he was expecting the police clearance by then. The petitioner received a letter dated 4.1.2005 from the Section Officer, CRRI asking for complete residential and official postal address etc. The petitioner alleges that thereafter he visited the office of the respondent (which respondent not clarified) every month to find out when he was required to join the post of Assistant Engineer Group -III(4) and was finally informed in July, 2005 that there was no vacancy for him. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the respondents be directed to issue him a letter of joining to the post of Assistant Engineer Group -III(4) forthwith.
2. The petition is opposed by the respondents and particularly by respondent No. 3-CRRI. In the counter affidavit filed, the circumstances in which the CRRI issued the letter dated 14.9.2004 is explained. In fact, as stated by the petitioner, the advertisement was issued for one post by the NPL. That post was filled up by appointment of Mr. Anuj Gaur. CRRI required the services of one Assistant Executive Engineer as at that time CRRI was undertaking the work of refurbishing of certain residential quarters. The CRRI requested ESD, CSIR vide letter No. DRRI/9.23 dated 22.4.2004 to depute personnel at the level of AEE Group III (4) from ESD. Consequently, the post of AEE Group III (4) was made available to CRRI under the Director General, CSIR reserve quota vide letter dated 20.8.2004. In order to provide the services of Assistant Executive Engineer, the CRRI desired to appoint a person out of those who had responded to the advertisement of NPL dated 11-17.10.2003 and accordingly the petitioner received the letter dated 14.9.2004. The counter affidavit further explains that instead of undertaking the work by itself the CRRI thought it proper to request the CPWD to do the work and CPWD finally agreed to undertake the work on behalf of CRRI and, therefore, CRRI does not need the services of Assistant Executive Engineer any more. Therefore, CRRI could not proceed to appoint the petitioner or any other person for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer which had been made available by ESD, CSIR. The post was made available only till a vacancy occurred in CRRI in grade III. It is stated that since the work for which the petitioner was required to be recruited was no more available the CRRI could not appoint the petitioner. It is further stated that no vested right accrued to the petitioner for appointment to CRRI. The advertisement was issued by NPL for one post and the NPL selected one person for that post and made an appointment accordingly.
3. In view of the facts explained above, the petitioner has no vested right to be appointed in CRRI. The advertisement, which he responded, to has already ended in appointing one person selected pursuant thereto.
4. The petition has no merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.