WPSS No.98 of 2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the respondents. An advertisement was issued for appointment of 16 persons on the post of Junior Assistants. The petitioner applied and his name was found at S.No.19 of the select list. It has been stated that all the 17 posts were filled up from the select list itself and the petitioner could not be given an appointment since the post had already filled up and his name was found at S.No.19. Subsequently, the services of one of the persons who was appointed was terminated and in his place, a person at S.No.18 of the select list was given an appointment. The petitioner contends that one of the selected persons has now resigned and, therefore, a vacancy has again occurred and the petitioner should be considered on that vacancy since he is next person at S.No.19 of the select list. In my opinion, the contention that the petitioner is entitled for appointment on such post, based on the said select list, is patently erroneous. Once the seats are filled up pursuant to an advertisement, the select list comes to an end and cannot be utilized even if the selected candidates resigned or their services are dismissed by the competent authority. Consequently, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. The writ petition is dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 23.02.2010 Shiv