BtU s c^C^ ia>DS^9 J- \^^fi7sr//ff'} BEFOBB THE HOK®TOAS&ESS&'SS .aEBXNISSWiSITO »RIK?HXE>* .'BKXN03M''BSN<^^-<T&BAiEiF *: ' ,:-'•:,' QSX@S» 'Ksm.a.ost^ y^~^S'^'b^)ss 20®e» SeWSQWs* %s^®s^HSS! CTIWft-.SH&R l!BSIttfi»t1 ::-.; Aged^aIseBt- 43-yeaiE's»:;. :- • s/o'Sbri BaI&itoaEi'::Mefeae», ' • ,Mt:--e/o*KElsh&»iOfeiaaa,i,NdttaE». 'Naya' K®s'fea'.BaEs»;.,:Btt39sa?ax?€#:' R&XSARH t 496®©1t ) • VSRSBS. 2he;''gfcate :!©£Madbya^raaesfo yteroagb"''k&e -s*ci?e't::sBr»!: :'•" '•' i'.' .-.'.^. -•.£/... e & S1tatl-is'B,lesB '62 'yallaB^.'ByaiaBKBhopal*1' '• $h®Seciwtary» '•":': --•• ! <MP-::<3'waiOB Serwl.ee::.Se3.»ctl.eB -!Ehzs»g&"tbe. :seea®'t*ry»|::^!-:-"': 'r A^aiaisfcEktiea ^ 4 . .' •'•• '. Eeoa®ai;c'.&/'StatAsfel.'es|l' • •Viffla^aGteiI.' awaB|;1 : - '':i: swpiat fSs') • ' : ;: •'•CTBBER-^ssaas:;i.s.,e®'taB':«EWSSS.S£K SS!S^ SS;;ES%%^?:S% :%S^:—Y-:;-—..-^——'.-.•<... a^ ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR A^ WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 1905 OF 2005 Vidya Dhar Mehar Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others Post for pronouhcement of order on Sf day of September, 2009 HIGHCOURTOFCHMATTISGARH: BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 1 905 OF 2005 PETITIONER Vidya Dhar Mehar RESPONDENTS Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri SatishK. Aghihotri, J. .^£—^...—-—._.--_—_.-:. Present:- Shri Rakesh Pandey, counsel fbr the petitioner. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Dy. Govt. AdvocatefoF the State of Chhattisgarh. Shri Malay Shrivastava, Adyocate on the authority of Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondents/State of Madhya Pradesh. ORDER (Delivered on this J?A^dav df September, 2009) The petitioner, by this petition, seeks a direction to direct the respondents to conduct the interview of the petitioner before the Junior Serviee Selection Board^Cfor shprt "the Board") by constituting the same, ifthe cbnstitutioh of the Board is not possible then the respondent-authorities may be directed to appoint the petitioner pn the postofAssistant Statistical Officer in terms ofthe order dated 3 FebEUary, 1993 passed by the Madhya Pradesh State AdminiStratiye Tribunal, Jabalpur (for short "theSAT"), in O.A.No.530/1990. The facts, in nutshell, as prqjected by the petitioner, are that pursuant to the advertisement No.08/1985 issued by tRe Board,, the petitiQnerappliedforselectionandappointmenton the post of Assistant Statistioal Officer. Written was test held on 25 December, 1Q8& and the petitioner was ideGlared as 1 SBM M81AJ31U! sq^ S}soclj :AjBJ3tunuj8dns 6uiiB8J3 inoqtiM I'snLii •jaoiyo |BO!I.S!^S;;|.O s}sod pauoipuEs pue IUBOBA ou e.18M 9je4}ieqi MOU)| Q^Qi.ueo J9UO!t!13d8q^ 'ypuncyiou. SBM aL)4ei|i sjeeA jnqt inoqe ^o esde] jeye paLujoj.ui sem jeuoiiBed 9Mi 'S661- 'J9cltu93aG] q,l-l- 34^ up piaq SBM MeiAjetui 941 )eq} tiLuqns p]nom jeuQiiflad eqijo^ BuueeddB issunoo peuje^-i •900Z S061.'ON (S)'d'/\A SB pejsqiunu-ej pue ynoo S!i)t oi ps.i^sue4 uaeq seq uo!teoi]dde siy} 'iVS 341 jo uoitniossip jayv •066i/Oe9'ON'V'0 u' siueoiidde JSLIIO eqi 01 pe}UBj6 SB 'pi|aj leoiiuapi -aqi joj. euiLuieio 1VS sq^ ejcysq OOOZ 'M^B^ ^ SL|t uo OOOZ/0291.'ON'VO 6uieq uogeoiiddB tussejd sqi p3|U JsuoBiisd aq} 'jeuesjaLji •inisseoonsun puno^ SBM .leuoiftsd eq} pue gesL 'jsqLueoea i.1. uo (,,|epue|/\| eq^ yoqs jo^) |epue|/\| euelbA BAfey sq) Aq papnpuoo SBM MSIAJSIUI ue 'J3A9MOL| 'pue ue 0} SLUB3 pjeog ai|t 'SLUitUBauj SL|} u] •pusLULUOosj ABLU pjeog eqi se Aiyoiues eq^ uOisse pue pgnssieq sjepjoiueiuiuiodde Ajesseoau 'inj.sseoons puno^ ejem Aeq} ji pue uiejeLi} StUeOllddE 9L|} JOj MeiAJS^U! P|OL| 01 SS!}UOL|inB-lU8pUOdS9J syi paioejip g66l 'Ajenjqa^ p^e peiep jspjo Aq ivs 341 'IVS "S4} s-io^q 066l./OSS'ON'V'Q Sfilsq uo4BOl|ddB UB p9|y suQSJsd peteniis Aiaeiiujis jsqpLiiiM Buo|e jeuofl!}ed eqi 'jeyeejaqi 'MSIAJSIU! JQ^ jenei ||eo eq} eAisoej iou pip inq '[nisseoonssBmqGnoqtjeuoi^adeqi •0661. 'Ajemqsj ^ pue 0661. '^enuerpi.e uo p|9q sq p|n9Mse}Bp!puBO in^sssosns eiit J.Q SM91AJ91UJ aq} leqiueiujiN -inv-ieBfoy ui psi^ou jeijljn^ sem i| •066L '^enuer ,QS PStep isiieqiu! in^sseoons ^ conducted and, assuch, fhe respondents may be directed t6 create supernumerary post ofStatistical Officer and to appoint the petitioner against that post. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondenfs would submit that the petitioner was interviewed along with other two persons on the11 December,1995 by the Mandal. Tqtal mark obtained bythe petitioner was 51.4% whereas the last person selected had obtained 62.5%. Accordingly, he was placedat S.No.34 in the main selection list and he was grarited appointment. The petitidner was not found fitand, as such, he was not granted appointment. With regard to the grievance of the petitioner that the Mandal was not competent, the said grievance is not correct, as after discontinuation of the Board, the Mandal was competent to conduct the interview and make recommendations for appointment. 1 have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. Be thatas it may, pursuant to the order dated 3 February, 1993 passed by SAT, in O.A.No.530/1990, the petitioner was interviewed and in the interview, the petitionerCould not obtaih the proper marks, so as to obtain appoihtmenf. It appears that theother person, who was interyiewed along with the petitioner, ha<T obtained 62.5% marks and fhe petitioner got 51.4% marks. Accordingly, the other person was appointed and the petitionercould not be appointed. —)'0 iGowri 8. Law on appointments is well settled that if a candidate is found unsuitable in the interview, he could not claim appointment as a matter of right. Even otherwise one can claim right to consideration in selection, but cannot claim right to appointment and, as such, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief, particularly directing the respondents to create supernumerary^post and to appoint the petitioner without having qualified marks in the interview. It is not for the High Court to direet the State Government to create supernumerary posts, as it involves financial implications and requirement of the post. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove and looking from all angles, the petitioner cannot be granted any relief and, as such, the writ petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. ^l /