- (1.) THE delay in filing the appeal has been sufficiently explained and is accordingly condoned.
(2.) WE have heard Shri Indrasen Singh Tomar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner -appellant. Shri Brijesh Pratap Singh appears for the respondents.
(3.) THIS Special Appeal arises out of judgment of learned Single Judge dated 24.9.2012, by which he dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the controversy raised is squarely covered by the judgment of Division Bench of this Court dated 8.2.2007 in the case of U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad and another vs. State of UP and another, 2007 5 ADJ 280 in which it was held that a candidate has no indefeasible right to claim appointment merely for the reason that his name is included in the select list as the State is under no legal duty to fill up all or any of the vacancy. A Review Application No.288071 of 2011 was dismissed on 8.8.2012 on the ground that there were 29 total posts of Sub Inspector (Radio Operator) which included backlog vacancies of reserved category. Only seven posts were available for general category. The petitioner was at serial no. 18 in general category and was kept in the wait list. All the seven appointments in general category were made? by the authorities. Since the petitioner was not within the merit list of seven general category candidates, he was not appointed. His assertion based on para 14 of the counter affidavit, that one person out of seven resigned after joining and therefore, one more appointment was made in general category from the selection in question, was not accepted on the ground that all the seven vacancies notified for selection have already been filled up by the candidates, who were higher in merit.;