JUDGMENT I. M. QUDDUSI, J. — Heard Mr. Pitamber Acharya learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advo¬cate for the State and Mr. B. K. Dash learned counsel appearing on behalf of Orissa Public Service Commission. 2. This writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal dated 18.5.1999 in O.A. No.875 of 1998 inter alia with a prayer to direct the Orissa Public Service Commission/opposite party No.2 to sponsor two names as requested by the State Government vide its letter dated 4.3.1998 for the post of Research Officer in the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Investigator under the Director, Town Planning, Orissa, Bhubaneswar. Later on, the post of Investigator was redesignated as Technical Assistant. Thereafter, he had applied for the post of Research Officer as a departmental candidate to the Orissa Public Service Commission pursuant to an advertisement issued by it in 1994 for filling up of the post under the quota of direct recruitment. He was allowed to participate in the selection, held for two posts of Research Officers, out of which one was reserved for Scheduled Tribe (Woman) and the other one was for General category. The petitioner applied for the general category post. 4. The Orissa Public Service Commission sent its recommen¬dation to the Government against only one post with its opinion that no one was available for the post, which was reserved for Scheduled Tribe woman. However, it appears that the Commission had recommended two names of general category candidates, keeping in mind that in case the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe women is dereserved, the other candidates would be considered against the same. The Commission recommended the names of Mr. A. K. Mohanty and Mr. K.C. Rath at Sl. Nos.1 and 2 respectively. Consequently, according to the recommendation of the Commission, Mr. A.K. Mohanty who was recommended at Sl. No.1 was appointed against the vacancy for general category but due to non-availability of reserved candidate to the other post opposite party No.1 decided to fill up the same by making ad hoc promotion. K.C. Rath at Sl. Nos.1 and 2 respectively. Consequently, according to the recommendation of the Commission, Mr. A.K. Mohanty who was recommended at Sl. No.1 was appointed against the vacancy for general category but due to non-availability of reserved candidate to the other post opposite party No.1 decided to fill up the same by making ad hoc promotion. Consequently the D.P.C., for the purpose of recommending candidates under the promotion quota was held and the following five Technical Assist¬ants found suitable were recommended by the D.P.C. Their names in order of seniority are as follows : 1. Mr. B. K. Moharana 2. Mr. Haladhar Rout 3. Mr. H. K. Mohanty 4. Mr. R. K. Biswal 5. Mr. Akshaya Kumar Mohanty. 5. On the basis of recommendation of the D.P.C. two posts of Research Officer reserved under promotion quota were filled up by making promotion of the candidates mentioned at Sl. Nos. 1 and 2 above vide order-dated 23.7.1997. Mr. B. K. Moharana was re¬tired in the mean time and in his place the person named at Sl. No.3, above was given promotion in that vacancy. Mr. R. K. Biswal whose name is mentioned at Sl. No.4 was promoted on ad hoc basis for the time being against the vacancy of S.T. (Women) under the quota of direct recruitment. 6. It appears that subsequently the 2nd post under the direct recruitment quota reserved for S.T. (women) for which no candidate became available by O.P.S.C. was thereafter de-reserved and the person, namely, K.C. Rath recommended by Commission was provisionally appointed as Research Officer on 29.11.1997 but he did not join in the post resulting which that post remained va¬cant. Thereafter the Government requested the Commission to send further names of general candidates, but the Commission vide its letter dated 3.4.1998 intimated the Government that the Commis¬sion had already recommended candidates found suitable vide their letter No.5229/PSC dated 28.7.1997 and the Commission has nothing more to do in the matter as the case stand closed so far as the Commission is concerned and that the Commission did not maintain any “waiting list”. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Acharya has submitted that the petitioner believes that his name was at Sl. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Acharya has submitted that the petitioner believes that his name was at Sl. No.3 in the merit list, prepared by the Selection Board consti¬tuted by the Commission, but the Commission deliberately did not recommend his name and when the Government asked the Commission to send more names, no name was sent by it. Learned counsel for the Orissa Public Service Commission, Mr. B.K. Dash submitted that the Commission did not maintain any waiting list and against one vacancy two names were already recommended since no candidate was found suitable against the post reserved for S.T. Women candidate with a view that in case the Government de-reserve the post, the next recommended person would be available for appoint¬ment. 8. Nothing is available before this Court to presume that the petitioner was found meritorious and his name was placed at Sl. No.3 in the merit list as the Commission had not shown any such thing in its record. There is nothing available on record to disclose the position of the petitioner. The Public Service Commission is the expert body having a constitutional status meant for the purpose to make recommendation and if the Commis¬sion did not find it proper to recommend any other name, nothing contrary can be presumed for the same. However, according to the instructions received by the learned Additional Government Advo¬cate from the Government in Housing and Urban Development Depart¬ment, Orissa, one post of Research Officer is still lying vacant under the direct recruitment quota. The Government should have sent requisition to the Commission to settle the same, but noth¬ing has been produced before us from which it may appear that a requisition has been sent to the O.P.S.C. for making selection and recommendation to fill up the vacant post of Research Offi¬cer. However, the record reveals that promotion quota is filled up regularly. It is the duty of the Government to fill up the quota of direct recruitment also while filling up the promotion quota as under the relevant rules 50% posts are reserved for promotion and 50% for direct recruitment and a roster is to be prepared giving places to promotees vis-a-vis direct recruits. 9. It is the duty of the Government to fill up the quota of direct recruitment also while filling up the promotion quota as under the relevant rules 50% posts are reserved for promotion and 50% for direct recruitment and a roster is to be prepared giving places to promotees vis-a-vis direct recruits. 9. Therefore, in our view, if the Government fill up the promotion quota without sending any requisition to the O.P.S.C. to fill up the quota of direct recruitment, the same is improper and would not be in the letter and spirit of the roster. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above, though no case here against the order passed by the learned Tribunal is made out, we feel that the Government should fill up the un-filled post under direct recruitment quota. 11. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to opposite party No.1 to fill up the post reserved for direct recruitment by sending requisition to the Orissa Public Service Commission within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order to them. Thereafter the O.P.S.C. shall advertise the same and make its recommendation as early as possible, preferably within a period of six months. 12. Needless to mention here that all eligible departmental candidates shall also be allowed to participate in the selection, in case they apply for the same and their applications are found to be in order. N. PRUSTY, J. I agree. Petition disposed of.