IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1734 of 2010 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9290 of 2009 ====================================================== 1. Avinash Kumar S/O Narmdeshwar Prasad R/O Vill& P.O.Idyapati Nagar(Near N.C.C.Office), P.S.Saharsa & Distt-Saharsa .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The Union Of India Through Administrative Officer, Ordinance Depot Telegaon Debhade Pune(Maharashtra) 2. Commandant, Ayudh Depot. Talegaon, Dhobude, Pune 3. Secretary, Defence , Ministry Of Defence New Delhi .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Mukund, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sarvadeo Singh, CGC ====================================================== 3 19-10-2011 Heard the parties and perused the order of the learned single Judge whereby writ petition preferred by the appellant has been dismissed. We do not find any illegality in the order of the Writ Court. The vacancies having been reduced, it is not possible to direct for appointment of the appellant in absence of vacancy. The leaned Writ Court has noticed that there was a stipulation in the advertisement that vacancies may increase or decrease. In such circumstances, it is not possible to grant relief to the appellant. The appeal is dismissed. The law on the issue is settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in several cases that inclusion of candidate’s name in the Patna High Court LPA No.1734 of 2010 (3) dt.19-10-2011 2 merit list does not confer any right. One may refer to AIR 1991 SC 1612 (Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India). So far as harassment to the appellant is concerned, the Writ Court has observed that if so advised he may claim damages through appropriate proceeding before the civil court. We are not interfering with this observation. sk (Shiva Kirti Singh, J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)