D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) A select list was prepared on 24.1.1989 against four posts of machine assistant. Vacancy against three posts was already in existence. The fourth vacancy was anticipated on account of imminent promotion of one of the machine assistants to the post of rotary machine operator. Machine Assistant Nasir Ahmad was promoted to the post of rotary machine operator by an order dated 29.8.1989. But he Joined the said post on 3.11.1989. It is on this post the petitioner was to be accommodated having been selected at the fourth place of the select list. But by reason of a ban imposed on 26.2.1989, the petitioner was informed through letter dated 21.12.1989 being Annexure-C.A. 1 to the counter-affidavit, that he could not be appointed because of the ban imposed on direct recruitment, but he will be given appointment as soon the ban is lifted. The ban was admittedly lifted in 1993. But no appointment was given to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner had came up with this writ petition.
(2.) It was alleged on behalf of the respondents that even after the ban was lifted, the petitioner could not be given appointment since the post was not available to a general category candidate but was reserved for scheduled caste/scheduled tribe candidate. It was also alleged that the select list stood expired after one year after it was so prepared.
(3.) Mr. Jai Krishna Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that the assurance given through the letter dated 21.12.1989 had induced the petitioner to wait till the ban was lifted, and, therefore, after the ban was lifted, the respondents cannot retrace from the promise on the principle of promissory estoppel as indicated in Annexure-C.A. 1. On account of the ban, the petitioner had waited till the ban was lifted which explains the delay in moving this writ petition in 1993. According to the learned counsel, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.;