Sudhir Narain, J. - (1.) THIS special appeal has been filed against the decision of the learned Judge dismissing the writ petition of the appellant by which he prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the District Judge, Basti, to appoint him as Class III employee. In the year 1983, the then District Judge, Basti held a regular selection for the post of Class III cadre of Basti Judgeship The result of the selection was declared in June 1983 The appellant was selected and he was placed at serial number 35. The vacancy to the post was to be filled up in accordance with the seniority and the vacancy had to be filled up within a period of one year. The selection list was to continue for one year. In the year 1984, one Durga Prasad Gupta took leave for five days. The appellant was appointed on his leave vacancy and the appellant worked on (the said leave vacancy from 22-4-1984 to 26-4-1984, Sri Durga Prasad Gupta resumed his duties on 27-4-1984. The appellant claims that he was appointed within a period of one year and therefore he was entitled to continue in the service. He placed reliance upon Rule 14 of the Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947 wich reads as under :- "Registration of selected candidates :- (1) The names of the candidates recruited in accordance with rule 12 shall be entered in order of merit in a bound register in Form (B) prescribed in Appendix I and each entry shall be initialled and dated by the District Judge after he has inspected the original of attested copies of certificates. An entry shall be made in the remark column against the name of a candidate who has qualified himself as a stenographer under rule 11. Note-An official working in the regular line shall be deemed to have qualified himself as a Stenographer if fit any examination held under rule 10 he is certified to possess a speed of 100 words per minute in shorthand and 35 words per minute in type-writing. (2) The name of any candidate entered under sub-rule (1) may be removed for inefficiency or misconduct.. (3) If any such candidate has not been given an appointment (offered in strict order of seniority according to the list in the bound register prescribed under sub-rule (1) within one :year from the date of his recruitment, his name shall be automatically removed from the register of recruited candidates he must then take bis chance with others for recruitment again in a subsequent year."
(2.) THE learned counsel for the appellant urged that if the appellant has worked even for a single day in whatever capacity, he shall be deemed to have been absorbed in the service. Rule 14 (3) of the Rules contemplates a regular appointment on the basis of (the selection but if any candidate has been appointed on a leave vacancy his appointment shall not be taken as a regular appointment on the basis of the selection. He is not being appointed on a vacant post. He works on a leave vacancy of an employee who is already holding that post. THE selection list which was prepared in the year 1983 exhausted itself after the expiry of one year and the appellant was not entitled to get any appointment after the expiry of one year under sub-Rule 3 of Rule 14 of the Rules. In the counter affidavit it has been further stated that the appellant was placed at serial number 35 and other selected candidates who were above the appellant, were entitled to be appointed on leave vacancy, but the appellant was given chance out of turn. This fact has not been controverted by the appellant in the rejoinder affidavit filed in the writ petition. In these circumstances the appellant was not entitled to any benefit of the selection which had taken place in the year 1983 in which he was placed at serial number 35. Ali the vacancies were filled up on the basis of the selection which had taken place in the year 2983 for the post of Class III cadre. In the year 1985, there was some vacancy in the police paper Copying Section of Basti Judgeship but the post were not sanctioned by the Government. The District Judge Basti appointed seven persons as police paper Copyists on daily wages The appellant was also appointed on daily wages on 10th September 1985. In the appointment letter it was clearly mentioned- "Keeping in view the heavy pendency in the police paper Copying Section, the following persons are engaged to work as police paper Copyists on dally wages, on the terms and conditions laid down in the G.O. No. 4269/VII A.N.-12/74, dated July 29, 1985 w e.f. 10-9-85 These persons shall have no claim for their regular appointment in the civil court which is meant for selected candidates of this Judgeship. Their engagement is liabe to be terminated at any times without giving any reason, they shall have no lien in the employment nor this employment shall in any way weigh in the future recruitments if any this Judgeship. Their employment may be ceased any day without any notice."
(3.) THE appellant continued to work on daily wages. THE Government sanctioned the post of 7 paper Copyists. THE appellant appeared in the said selection but he was not selected. Those candidates who were selected were given appointments but as the appellant was not selected in the selection which was held in the year 1985 he was not given any further Job of the copyist. THE learned counsel for the appellant urged that he was entitled to be absorbed in the service as he was working on daily wages basis as a copyist. He placed reliance upon Jacob M Puthuparambil v. Kerala Water Authority. 1991 (1) SCC 28 In this case the Supreme Court on interpretation of Section 9 (a) (1) of the Kerala Water Supply and Severage Act, 1986 held that those Employees who were in long continuous service of the Authority their services should be regularised by the Authority. THE Supreme Court Itself distinguished the case of P. K. Narayani v State of Kerala, 1984 (Supp.) SCC 212, where the employees who were working for past few years challenged the action of the employer in terminating their services to make room for the candidates selected by the Kerala Public Service Commission. THE Supreme Court directed that those petitioners and all other employees similarly placed should be allowed to appear in the next examination when the Public Service Commission may hold, without raising the age bar and till then the petitioners and others may continue in the service provided there are vacancies. In the present case, the appellant was given an opportunity but as he was not a selected candidate of the year 1984, he was not given appointment and regularly selected candidates were given appointment. THE appellant cannot claim any right on the basis that he had worked on daily wages. Again in the year 1988, there were certain posts of paid apprentice in the Court of Munsif Khalilabad at Basti. The District Judge, Basti, on 11-1-1988 appointed the appellant on temporary basis on the said post. As the Court of Vth Additional Judge, Basti was shifted from Basti Judgeship to Barabanki Judgeship and in order to adjust the permanent staff of that Court, services of three temporary junior most officials were terminated w.e.f. 1st June, 1988. The appellant was one of them. Obviously, the said post was temporary and the permanent staff was to be accommodated on shifting of the Court of Vth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Basti to Barabanki Judgeship. The appellant has not stated any where that be was not junior most and he was illegally discriminated.;