Waiting list does not create a vested right to appointment; fresh recruitment may proceed once notified vacancies are filled.

Inclusion in a waiting list or select list does not, by itself, create a vested or enforceable right to appointment where the candidate was selected only against notified vacancies. Once those vacancies are filled, subsequent vacancies must be filled through fresh recruitment from the open market in accordance with merit and equality of opportunity. Authorities cannot be restrained from making later recruitment merely to exhaust a waiting list, and no direction can issue to compel appointment absent a legal right or a complaint that a lower-ranked candidate was appointed.

---

---

Issues: Whether inclusion in a waiting list or select list confers a vested right to appointment, and whether the authorities can be restrained from filling subsequent vacancies through fresh recruitment until the waiting list is exhausted.

Analysis: A candidate selected only against notified vacancies does not acquire an enforceable right to appointment merely because his name appears in the waiting list. After the notified vacancies are filled, subsequent vacancies are required to be filled from the open market in accordance with merit and the constitutional mandate of equality of opportunity. No direction can be issued to postpone fresh recruitment or to compel appointment of a waiting-listed candidate in the absence of a legal right or a grievance based on appointment of a lower-ranked candidate.

Conclusion: Inclusion in the waiting list did not create any vested right to appointment, and the request to block subsequent recruitment until the waiting list was exhausted was rightly declined.

---