In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has clarified that a candidate placed on a waitlist holds no absolute right to be considered for appointment. The court also stated that a waiting list cannot remain valid for an indefinite period, bringing clarity to prolonged selection processes.
Court Dismisses Petition by Aspiring Teachers
The judgment was delivered by Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery in November while dismissing a petition filed by Nitish Maurya and four others. The petitioners had participated in a selection process for the posts of assistant teachers (LT Grade) in privately managed, recognized, and aided higher secondary schools. The recruitment was advertised by the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Service Selection Board (UPSESSB) in Prayagraj.
Initially, the petitioners did not find a place in the merit list or even the waiting list. They subsequently approached the high court, which issued directions to the Board to fill all state vacancies following a specific procedure.
Legal Journey and Final Ruling
The state government filed a special appeal against the single-judge bench's order. Following this, it was ordered that all vacancies be filled by selected candidates who had not joined any post and also by waitlisted candidates, giving them options to choose their placement in institutions. A fresh panel of candidates was to be prepared accordingly.
The Secretary of UPSESSB then communicated with the Director of Education (Secondary) regarding counselling for vacant posts under the waiting list. The counselling process was completed for both selected and waitlisted candidates. However, a subsequent order stated there was no need to modify the earlier waitlist, which led the petitioners to challenge this order in the high court.
In its final order, Justice Shamshery reiterated established legal principles. "It is well settled that a person in a waiting list has no absolute right for consideration to get appointed as well as that a waiting list cannot remain in existence for an unlimited period or a particular selection process cannot remain pending for an unlimited period," the court stated.
Implications of the Judgment
This ruling sets a crucial precedent for recruitment processes across Uttar Pradesh, especially in the education sector. It underscores that candidature on a waitlist is not a guarantee of employment and that recruitment bodies must conclude selection processes within a reasonable timeframe.
The judgment brings relief to recruiting authorities like the UPSESSB, allowing them to finalize old recruitment drives and proceed with new ones without the obligation to keep waitlists active indefinitely. For candidates, it highlights the importance of securing a position in the primary merit list rather than relying on waitlist status for prolonged periods.
