B.Sreenivasulu, v. The District Employement

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.07.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM WRIT PETITION NO.9405 of 2017 B.Sreenivasulu

...Petitioner

Vs.

1. The District Employment Officer, Employment Office, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020.

2. The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai Rippon Building, Chennai

3. The Supervising Engineer, Solid Waste management Department, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

...Respondents

Prayer: The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner for any of the post of Fourth Grade in the available vacancy as per the interview conducted on 31.08.2010 within the time frame fixed by this court.

For Petitioner : Ms.K.Seetharam For Respondents : Mr.K.Dhananjayan Special Government Pleader R1 Mr. G. Anantha Rangan- R2 & R3

O R D E R

The relief sought for in the writ petition is for a direction to direct the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner for any of the post of Fourth Grade in the available vacancy as per the interview conducted on 31.08.2010.

2. The claim of the writ petitioner is that he participated in the interview held on 31.08.2010 and his certificates were also verified on the same day. But the writ petitioner was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

neither selected nor issued with an order of appointment. A mere participation in the process of selection will not confer any legal right on the writ petitioner to seek an order of appointment. The legal principle is that appointment can never be claimed as a matter of right and only in the event on coming out successfully in the recruitment process, the petitioner will be vested with an order of appointment, and the right will accrue, not otherwise. Hence, the prayer, as such, sought for in this writ petition merely seeking an order of appointment is absolutely misconceived and this Court cannot entertain such a prayer in the absence of any semblance of legal right established by the writ petitioner in this petition.

3. Thus, no further consideration is required in the writ petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.

-s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar av/svn To

1. The District Employment Officer, Employment Office, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020.

2. The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai Rippon Building, Chennai +1 CC to Mr.K. Seetharam, Advocate sr 49004 +1 CC to Mr.G. Anantha Rangan, Advocate sr 48851 +1 CC to Govt. Pleader sr 48780 WP No.9405 of 2017 SP(26/07/2017) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/