SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.:–The case is being taken up from defect side. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to submit the original petition along with attested affidavits and also remove all the defects pointed out by the Registry within two weeks from today. 3. Admittedly, the advertisement for the post of Prakhand Teacher was issued in the year 2008 and 207 posts were advertised. The case of the petitioners are that 38 posts remain unfilled. A select list cannot be said to be alive for 14 years, the State Government has chosen not to fill up the remaining vacancies. Under the advertisement of 2008, after 14 years, this Court would not direct the State or its authorities to fill up the said posts. The petitioners and other candidates may have also become overage by now. 4. Even otherwise, in view of the law laid down in the case of Shankarsan Dash Vs. Union of India reported as AIR 1991 SC 1612 , no right of appointment is vested in favour of the petitioners merely because they had applied under the said advertisement. The State Government and its authorities have exclusive right not to fill up the posts, of course, for cogent reasons. 5. Considering the aforesaid aspects, this Court does not find any reasons to pass orders to direct the State or its authorities to fill up the posts after a period of 14 years. 6. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.