""I HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WntPeti.tion No. 4013 of 2006 Petitioner Bahoran Lal Bhargav, S/o Shri S. L. Bhargav, aged about 38 years, R/o Vitlage Sendari, Tehsfl & District Bflaspur (CG) Versus Respondents 1. State of Chltattisgarh, Through the Secretaiy, H^her Education Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director, Technical Education, DirEctoi-ate, Byron Bazar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 3. The Additional Director, Tecluiical Education, Dircctorate, Byron Bazar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 4. The Prinfcipal, Goverrunent Engiaeerins CoUege, Koni Bilaspur, District BUaspur (CG) WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OE_THE CON_STrTUTION OF INDiA. (SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.) Shri Anand Dadaria, Advocate for fhe petitioner. Shri Aryiad Dubey, Panel Lawyer for fhe respondents. '\ (Passed on fhis 23ri day ofJune, 2009) Heard. In tbis inatter, fhe petitiouer seeks a writ/direction to fhe respondent No.l to create a new post ofAssistaut Librarian aad appoiut fhe petitioner on fhe basis of the recoiiunendations raade by letter dated 17.7.2000 (Anaexure P/8) and 28.9.2004 (AniiexuTe P/ 12). Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner subniits that the petitioner was iaitiaUy appoiated as Ham.m.al' (Class-IV) on 2.2.1987. Subsequentiy, by order dated 3.1.1992 (AnnexLire P/1) his services were regularized on tbat post. The petitioner was assigued the work ofAssistaut Librariaa in Jaauaiy, 1990. Siiice then fhe petitiouer contuiues to perfonn duties of Assistant 'ffS. r* ti § '^ ^ ^ .X 3. 4. 5. Librarian, as is evident froni the certi&cate dated 19.5.1997 (Annexure P/2) as weB as fh.e letter dated 17.7.2000 (Aniiexure P/8) and 28.9.2004 (Annexure P/ 12). On the basis ofassigniaent of work on fbe post of Assistant Librariaa fbe petitioner clainis apponitment on fhe post of Assistant Librarian. Having heard learued counsel appeartag for the petitiouer and having perused the docuaients appended fhereto, it is evident fhat the peti.tion.er was irutially appoiated on fhe post of HamTnal (Class-IV) on daily wages aiid szibsequently his services were regulanzed on 3.1.1992 on fhe post ofHaxuin.al. The pentioner was never appoiated on the post ofAssistaat Librariau. He inight have been given the work to help Assistaiit Librariaa or to look after tiie work of the said post. By virtue of his experience for working as Assistant Librarian, the petitioner does not get aay 'right for appoiatinent on fhe post. It is weU settled priuciple oflaw tfaat a person, who Iias not been appointed fhrough proper selectiou process, in accordauce witli fhe constitutional schenie of eniployinent, caanot be directed to be appoiated on a particular post. If such a direction is issued the same niay amount to back door entiy. It is a trite law that no direction to create a new post for appointiaent of petitioner on fhe post ofAssistant Librarian ceua be ruade. In view of the foregoiag, fhe petition is devoid of uierit aud is disiuissed, accordiagly. No order asto costs. Thakur ' Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge