JUDGMENT 1. - The appointment on the posts of Lower Division Clerks in subordinate courts is governed by the Rajasthan Subordinate Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1986, (in short, 'the Rules') framed by the Governor in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India in consultation with the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan. 2. Rule 6(b) provides the method of recruitment to the general cadre as Lower Division Clerk by a competitive examination. 10% of the total number of vacancies in each Judgeship shall be reserved for being filled in by promotion amongst the Class IV employees who have put in five years' of service in the Judgeship concerned and possess the academic qualification prescribed by these Rules for the post of Lower Division Clerk. 3. The frequency of examination is contained in Rule 15, according to which early in each year or as the circumstances may require, each District Judge shall recruit as many candidate for his Judgeship as required for the vacancies likely to arise in the course of the year. In view of Rule 19(iii) the select list survives only for one year. Rule 23 deal with the appointments, it run as follows : "23. Appointments (1) All appointments to the Ministerial establishment shall be made by the District Judge, except in the case of Stenographers, first appointment shall be made to the lowest post. (2) In filling the posts of Stenographers preference shall be given to officials possessing the prescribed qualifications who are already working in the Judgeship in which the vacancy has occurred. (3) A vacancy which cannot be filled in immediately either by direct recruitment or by promotion, may be filled in by appointing authority by appointing temporarily thereto a person eligible for direct recruitment or by appointing thereto an official eligible for appointment to the post by promotion : Provided that such appointment will not be continued beyond a period of one year." This rule empowers the appointing authority to fill up vacancy by appointing temporarily a person who is eligible for direct recruitment in case the vacancy is not going to be filled in by direct recruitment in near future. But this appointment will in no case be continued beyond a period of one year. It fixes an outer limit. But this appointment will in no case be continued beyond a period of one year. It fixes an outer limit. According to this mandatory provision the temporary appointment will come to an end after the expiry of one year, even if no regular selection has been made. It is for the appointing authority to reappoint him or not to appoint him. 4. In terms of Rule 23(3) the petitioner was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk by the District & Sessions Judge, Sawaimadhopur on 30.1.92 only for a period of three months or till duly selected candidate was available, whichever was earlier. Subsequently the period was extended up to 30.6.92 but before the expiry of the term, an order of termination was passed on 23.6.92 by the District Judge, Sawaimadhopur terminating the service with effect from 1.7.92. This termination order was challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 4471/92. 5. On 8.7.92 an interim order was passed by this Court directing the' respondent to permit the petitioner to work on the post of Lower Division Clerk. In pursuance of the same, on 9.7.92 an order was passed by the District Judge, permitting him to work. 6. The District & Sessions Judge, Sawaimadhopur issued a notice on 4.5.92 for making direct recruitment on twenty- three posts of Lower Division Clerk on regular basis. 7. An advertisement was issued in the news paper to fill up twenty-three vacancies. The petitioner also made an application in response to that. He appeared in the written test held on 28.6.92 and later-on in the typing test as well. The result was declared on 25.9.93. Petitioner's name appeared at serial No. 38. According auric 19 sub rule (iii) the appointment could only be made in strict order of seniority of the panel. This panel is valid only for one year i.e. up to 24.9.94. 8. The petitioner was continuing at Sawaimadhopur Judgeship on the basis of the interim order of this court dated 8.7.92. In the meantime he got himself transferred from Sawaimadhopur to Dausa Judgeship on 16.12.92. But the prime question to be considered is what right did he carry along with him on that date to Dausa Judgeship. His temporary service had been terminated on 23.6.92. He was continuing on the basis of interim order on the date of transfer. In the meantime he got himself transferred from Sawaimadhopur to Dausa Judgeship on 16.12.92. But the prime question to be considered is what right did he carry along with him on that date to Dausa Judgeship. His temporary service had been terminated on 23.6.92. He was continuing on the basis of interim order on the date of transfer. So in the eye of law he did not have any subsisting legal right to hold the post. His continuance in service was subject to the result of the writ petition. 9. His writ petition No. 4471/92 was allowed on 9.2.93 and the order of termination dated 23.6.92 was set aside. He was allowed to continue in service till the availability of regularly selected person. The District Judge, Sawaimadhopur was directed to declare the result within three months. 10. On 5.5.93 the District Judge, Sawaimadhopur moved an application (No. 159/93) bringing to the notice of the Court that on account of certain reasons, he could not stick to the time schedule of three months for declaration of the result, fixed in the judgnent dated 9.2.93. 11. The result was declared on 25.9.93. Application No. 159/93 was disposed of thereafter on 24.1.94 by the following order : "Now the District Judge should act in accordance with the rules and should immediately appoint those persons whose names are included in the select list. For appointment of such persons he must remove those temporary persons who have not been selected. The District Judge should comply with the direction forthwith and submit his compliance report to the court within a period of seven days and the case was to be listed again on 2.2.94." The effect of this order was that the District Judge, Sawaimadhopur was required to fill up all the twenty-three vacancies from the select list strictly in accordance with the merit. 12. The application was listed again on 17.2.94. A statement was made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the District Judge, Sawaimadhopur that all the temporary Lower Division Clerks have been removed from service and they were replaced by the regularly selected candidates from the select list. A difficulty arose as to what would happen to those persons who were in the meantime transferred to some other Judgeship. A difficulty arose as to what would happen to those persons who were in the meantime transferred to some other Judgeship. The Court passed the following order on 17.2.94 : "It is hoped that those Lower Division Clerks who had secured their transfers out-side Sawaimadhopur and who have not succeeded in passing the competitive test will be removed by the concerned District Judges and will be replaced by regularly selected persons. This file shall now be consigned to record." A reading of these two orders dated 24.1.94 and 17.2.94 shows that the District Judge, Sawaimadhopur was required to terminate alt the temporary persons and in their place regularly selected candidates from the select list prepared on 25.9.93 were be given appointment. All those temporarily appointed persons who had been transferred outside Sawaimadhopur were also to be removed by the concerned District Judges under whom they were working. They were also to be replaced by selected persons from the same select list strictly in accordance with the merit. 13. The position as it emerges is that as a result of the advertisement dated 4.5.92, only twenty-three posts were to be filled in by the regularly selected candidates and all of them have been filled-in from the select list prepared on 25.9.93. The petitioner stood at serial No. 38 so he did not have any right for appointment. It has also come on record that in the meantime four more vacancies had occurred in the same year and they have also been filled in. In all, twenty-seven persons have been appointed out of that select list. The petitioner now is in the waiting list. In case eleven more vacancies arise before 25.9.94 then of-course the petitioner can be appointed and not otherwise. 14. The District Judge, Dausa vide his order dated 265.94 terminated petitioner's service by referring to the order dated 24.1.94. This petition is directed against the said order. 15. After a show cause notice was issued to the respondents, a reply has been filed. 16. Heard learned counsel for both the parties at length. 17. The first point raised on behalf of the petitioner was that the District Judge, Dausa has failed to consider the order dated 17.2.94 which according to him has superseded the earlier order dated 24.1.94. There is no merit in this submission. 18. 16. Heard learned counsel for both the parties at length. 17. The first point raised on behalf of the petitioner was that the District Judge, Dausa has failed to consider the order dated 17.2.94 which according to him has superseded the earlier order dated 24.1.94. There is no merit in this submission. 18. The learned Single Judge, while allowing the writ petition and quashing the earlier order of termination dated 23.6.92, has held that the petitioner will be entitled to continue in service till the availability of regularly selected persons. The result was declared on 25.9.93. A select list was prepared. Petitioner's name was shown at serial No. 38. There were only twenty-three posts to be filled in. The order dated 24.1.94, which was passed on the application of the respondent explaining the delay in declaring the result, directed the District Judge to appoint immediately those persons whose names were included in the select list and remove all those temporary persons who have not been selected. The second order dated 17.2.94 only clarifies the earlier order according to which even those temporary employees who have been transferred outside Sawaimadhopur and have not succeeded in the written test, will be removed by the concerned District Judges. 19. According to the learned counsel, the effect of the order dated 17.2.94 is that only those temporary persons were to be removed who had not succeeded in passing the competitive test. His contention is that since the petitioner had qualified and his name appeared in the select list, it amounts to his succeeding in the competitive examination. There is no merit in this submission.19A. The words 'selected' and 'succeeded' in the examination, are sometimes inter-changeable and may be treated a synonyms for each other. These words get colour with reference to their use. They convey almost similar meanings in the matter of appointments. The word 'selected' as explained in the Webster's Dictionary, means chosen from a number or group by fitness or preference; of signal value or excellence; exclusively or fastidiously chosen often with regard to social, economic or cultural characteristics, whereas, the word succeeding reference to success, means a degree or measure of succeeding; favourable or desired outcome; the attainment of wealth, favour or eminence; resulting in termination in success; giving or having gained success. The petitioner may have succeeded in the competition and his name found place in the select list, but the interpretation of the two orders passed by this court, one on 17.2.94 and the other on 24.1.94, leads to the conclusion that the court was of the view that all the temporary persons should be removed and only those who have succeeded in the examination and their names find place" in the select list, should be given appointment in accordance with the seniority in the merit list. 20. Finding place of one's name in the select list, can be said that he has succeeded in the examination but 'selection' follows the 'success' in the examination. On account of succeeding in examination his name appears in the select list and in case his position in the merit list comes within the required number of vacancies, it can be said that he has only qualified himself for appointment. One may have sometimes succeeded in the examination but may not be finally selected for appointment on account of the fact that he was quite low in the merit list. The total number of vacancies should be filled in strictly in accordance to the merit position in the select list. 21. The petitioner may have qualified or succeeded for selection, his name might have appeared in the select list, but since he was very low in the merit list i.e. at serial No. 38, and there were only twenty-three vacancies which were subsequently raised to twenty-seven, he has no right to be appointed. It only shows that he has qualified in the competitive test and nothing beyond it. 22. No right is created in a person for appointment only because of inclusion of his name in the merit list. Impleadment of a candidate in the select list only gives him a right for being considered for appointment as he has qualified in the competition/examination. It does not create any vested right to be appointed unless the service rules so otherwise provide. Impleadment of a candidate in the select list only gives him a right for being considered for appointment as he has qualified in the competition/examination. It does not create any vested right to be appointed unless the service rules so otherwise provide. Reference may be made to the decisions of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Subhash Chandra Marwaba, AIR 1973 SC 2216 ; Jagdamba Paper Industry (P.) Ltd. v. Haryana State Electricity Board, 1974 1 SCR 165 ; Jatinder Kumar v. State of Punjab, AIR 1984 SC 1850 ; Miss Neelima Shangla v. State of Haryana, AIR 1987 SC 169 ; Shankarsan Das v. Union of India, AIR 1991 SC 1612 ; State of Bihar v. The Secretariat Assistants Successful Examinees Union 1986, JT 1993(6) SC 462 ; and Antim Ramdeo v. State of Rajasthan, 1994 1 WIC (Raj.) 765 . 23. In the case reported in JT 1993(5) 439, Union of India v. Shri Sudesh Kumar Bhargava , the respondent was selected by the Public Service Commission to the post of Chief Controller of Explosives. The appointing authority after considering certain adverse remarks in his record, found that he was not suitable for appointment. Supreme Court took the view that the appointing authority was perfectly justified in not appointing him and it was not required to give any reasons even though it was expected that it will act fairly. 24. The right of a candidate whose name appears in the waiting list prepared on the basis of the competitive examination, has been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat State Dy. Executive Engineers Association v. State of Gujarat, JT 1994(3) SC 559 . In that case it was held that the waiting list does not furnish a source of recruitment. It is operative only for the contingency that if any of the selected candidates does not join, then person from the waiting list may be pushed up and be appointed in the vacancy so caused or if there is some extreme urgency, the Government may, as a matter of policy decision, take up persons in order of merit from the waiting list. 25. Apart from this, the petitioner has not been able to show his existing legal right for appointment on account of the judgment dated 92.93 in writ petition No. 4771/92. 25. Apart from this, the petitioner has not been able to show his existing legal right for appointment on account of the judgment dated 92.93 in writ petition No. 4771/92. According to that, he was only permitted to work as a Lower Division Clerk till the result of regular selection was declared and regular appointments were made. Since all the vacancies have been filled in and the petitioner's name being at serial No. 38, he is in the waiting list, he has no right to claim appointment. 26. Admittedly, the list survives up to 29.9.1994. If by that time the total vacancies come to thirty-eight, then of-course he will be entitled for appointment. His right, if any, ended after one year from the date of his appointment in view of Rule 23 sub-rule (3) and even according to the judgment dated 9.2.93 in writ petition No. 4771/92, he had a right to continue till regularly selected candidates joined the post. He was required to give way to the newly selected candidates who would fill up the vacancies strictly in accordance with merit shown in the select list dated 25.9.93. 27. On account of his transfer from Sawaimadhopur to Dausa Judgeship, his right remained the same as they were in Sawaimadhopur Judgeship where his services have already been terminated but he was continuing under the stay order of the court dated 8.7.92 and subsequently on account of the judgment in his writ petition No. 4771/92 till regularly selected candidates become available. He could carry only those rights to Dausa Judgeship which he had at Sawaimadhopur. On account of transfer, his position did not improve in any way. 28. After the declaration of the result on 25.9.93, all the ad hoc and temporary employees have been replaced by regularly selected candidates. All the existing vacancies have been filled in. There is no more any vacancy. 29. The other submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that since some posts of Lower Division Clerk are lying vacant at Dausa, the petitioner having successfully passed the competitive test at Sawaimadhopur, was entitled to be appointed at Dausa out of the list prepared at Sawaimadhopur. This submission has no merit. The procedure for direct recruitment is contained in Part IV of the Rules. This submission has no merit. The procedure for direct recruitment is contained in Part IV of the Rules. Perusal of Rule 15 shows that early in each year or as the circumstances may require, each District Judge shall recruit as many candidates for his Judgeship as may be required or likely to arise in the course of year. So, the advertisement which was issued, the examination which was held and the result so declared by the District Judge, Sawaimadhopur, were only for that Judgeship. The select list so prepared will be relevant for the vacancies at Sawaimadhopur only and for no other District. Other District Judges will have separate examination for their Judgeship. 30. The last submission raised by the learned counsel was that though the petitioner was appointed till 30.6.92 on ad hoc basis at Sawaimadhopur but since he was transferred at Dausa and vacancies were already there so a special test should be held for the petitioner for that Judgeship. I have yet to find a more frivolous submission than this. 31. There is no rule under which a special test should be held for him and what right he has for such a special test at Dausa. Except raising the point no further argument has been advanced. 32. He made a reference to a circular issued by the Registrar, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur on 9.8.91 through which all the District Judges were directed that all the ad hoc appointees will have to qualify the recruitment test for regularisation of their services as per rules. They were directed to hold the recruitment test within a period of three months for regularisation of the services of such ad hoc appointees. According to him the District Judge, Dausa was also required to hold a test but having not done so, he has committed a mistake. There is no material on record to show that the District Judge, Dausa has not held any test within time as indicated in that circular. If any District Judge has failed to act in accordance with the circular, it is for the High Court, on the administrative side, to take action against him. It gives no right to the petitioner. 33. For the reasons given herein above, the petitioner has failed to establish his right to claim appointment by only remaining in the waiting list. If any District Judge has failed to act in accordance with the circular, it is for the High Court, on the administrative side, to take action against him. It gives no right to the petitioner. 33. For the reasons given herein above, the petitioner has failed to establish his right to claim appointment by only remaining in the waiting list. The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed with costs, which I assess to be Rupees One Thousand only. The interim order dated 8.7.92 stands automatically discharged.Writ Petition Dismissed *******