Judgment Present petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to issue appointment letter to the petitioner on the post of Principal of Government Pharmacy Institute, Bariatu, Ranchi. 2. Petitioner's case is that only three candidates had applied for the said post, however, only two candidates appeared in the interview out of which name of the another candidate namely Asha Rani was recommended for the post of Professor, therefore, petitioner remained the sole candidate. Consequently, his name ought to have been recommended for the appointment and accordingly appointment letter should have been issued for his name. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Piprawal, learned counsel appearing for the Jharkhand Public Service Commission submits that name of the petitioner was never recommended by the Commission for the post of Principal since no candidate was found suitable for the post of Principal. 4. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Punjab State Electricity Board and Ors. Vs. Malkiat Singh reported in (2005) 9 SCC 22 while relying on the earlier decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Shankarsan Dash Vs. Union of India reported in (1991) 3 SCC 47 , All India SC & ST Employees' Association Vs. A. Arthur Jeen reported in (2001) 1 SCC 380 and State of Orissa Vs. Bhikari Charan Khuntia reported in (2005) 10 SCC 144 has held that the successful candidate does not acquire indispensable right to be appointed. In the present case petitioner's name was never recommended since he was not found suitable for the post of Principal. 5. Therefore, petitioner has absolutely no right to be appointed on the post of Principal. 6. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bihar Eastern Gangetic Fishermen Coop. Society Ltd. Vs. Sipahi Singh reported in (1977) 4 SCC 145 has held as under: “As per the dictum of the Apex Court, a writ of mandamus can be issued only when there is legal right in favour of the petitioner and authorities are bound to discharge the statutory obligation.” 7. In the present case since petitioner has no right for the appointment, therefore, writ of mandamus cannot be issued in favour of the petitioner. 8. Consequently, this writ petition fails and hereby dismissed.