- (1.) RAKESH Tiwari, J. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THIS writ petition was filed challenging the validity of advertisement dated 30-8-2001 for examination of Group "c" posts of Typist in Government Press Allahabad and for commanding the respondents to take interview and appoint the petitioner who were successful in the selection held earlier. The prayer in the writ petition are as follows: - (1) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned vacancies of typist, advertised on 30-8-2001 by the Government Press, Allahabad. (2) Issue writ order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of typist in the Government Press Allahabad, by adopting a due procedure of law. (3) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. (4) Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner. So far as the second prayer is concerned for commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioners on the post of typist is concerned cannot be granted by this Court. As early as in 1991 a constitution bench of the apex Court in the case of Shanker Das v. Union of India, 1991 (2) UPLBEC page 933, held that the successful candidates do not acquire an indefeasible right to appointment in government Services. The decisions not to fill up the vacancies is prerogative of the Government and unless relevant recruitment rules provide so, the state is under no legal obligation to fill up all or any of the vacancies. In this view the second prayer is misconceived. In so far as question of quashing the vacancies is concerned. It appears that the petitioner prayed for quashing of the advertisement and not for quashing the vacancies.
(3.) INITIALLY vacancies for the post of junior clerks and typist were published on 10-8-1998. By a subsequent corrigendum dated 4-9-1998 the posts of junior clerks and typists were advertised separately. After examination interviews were postponed on two occasions but result was not announced, hence some candidates who had appeared in the interview approached this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 42197 of 1959 Km. Sudha Pandey v. Government Press Allahabad. The writ petition was filed on the ground that the respondents had no authority to re-publish the vacancies of typist on Government Press. Without deciding the claim and right of those candidates who had already appeared in the test and interview and had been declared successful and they have right to appointment as only 12 candidates had been found successful as against thirteen vacancies. No enquiry is said to have been held till filing of the writ petition. The Court by order-dated 29-11-1999 disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Government Press Allahabad to decide the matter and this complaint received within three months.;