1. Heard, learned advocate for the petitioner. The supplementary affidavit is taken on record.
2. The petitioner by way of this petition under Article-226 of Constitution of India, has approached this Court with following prayers.
(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent District Court, Banaskantha at Palanpur to decide and act as per the representation of the petitioner dated 08/12/2012 (Annexure-D) and be further pleased to direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Peon before filling up the vacant posts pursuant to advertisement dated 26/07/2012.
(B) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondents to decide and act as per the representation of the petitioner dated 08/10/2012 (Annexure-D).
(C) Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be thought just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
3. The petitioner is thus, taken-out this petition essentially for seeking appropriate relief qua her interview, which was conducted for the post of peon and result whereof is not notified to her. The petitioner s attempt to obtain result has not yielded any result and hence this petition.
4. The Court is of the view that the petition is being bereft of merits, deserves rejection and is accordingly rejected for the following reasons.
(i) The petitioner has not made-out a case for entertaining this petition in any manner. The petitioner s counsel failed in establishing any right much less any fundamental right to seek the prayers, which have been mentioned in the memo of the petition. The petitioner could have obtained appropriate information by resorting the right for getting information, but unfortunately when that remedy is not pursued, the Court is of the view that when even select list candidate has no right to be shown in the select list and when the candidate is coming on the strength of mere apprehension of the interview, then no writ petition of such nature could be entertained. It goes without saying that now as per the new advertisement, the recruitment procedure is being undertaken by the High Court itself for filling-up the vacancies of such nature in the District and Sub-ordinate Courts. The Court is therefore, of the view that the petition is required to be rejected and accordingly it is rejected as no right is established much less any fundamental right. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) Rathod...
Page 3 of 3