HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 21502 of 2021 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition with the following prayer:- "i. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities to release and make payment of enhanced salary and allowance of 11 months in terms of the order dated 26.10.2016 passed by the respondent no. 2, U.P. Legal Services Authority, Lucknow. ii. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the competent authorities to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment of Member Permanent Lok Adalat, Rampur." 3. Today when the matter is taken, learned counsel stated that he does want to press the prayer No.1 and prays to dismiss the aforesaid prayer as not pressed. 4. In this view of the matter, insofar as prayer No.1 is concerned, the writ petition is dismissed. 5. Insofar as the prayer No.2 is concerned, it is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had also worked as member of Permanent Lok Adalat, Rampur for the period of five year, i.e., from Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Om Narayan Mishra, Shoar Mohammad Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anubhav Singh, C.S.C., Sudhir Mehrotra Sameena Yasmeen .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 2016 to May, 2021 and after completing aforesaid term, he again submitted fresh application for appointment as a member of Permanent Lok Adalat, Rampur on 20.08.2021 pursuant to the advertisement dated 04.08.2021. It is argued that once the petitioner has worked for the post of member of Permanent Lok Adalat, Rampur for five years, her experience is liable to be counted for consideration of her application for appointment as member of Permanent Lok Adalat, Rampur. 6. On the other hand, it is argued by learned counsel for the respondents that once the period of petitioner has come to end, the petitioner may apply for fresh appointment on the post in question, the respondent will consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment on the post in question as per procedure prescribed in law. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. From perusal of the record, it is clear that pursuant to advertisement published in the year 2021, the petitioner has applied for the post of member of Permanent Lok Adalat, Rampur. Nothing has been argued nor any documents have been placed before the Court regarding the outcome of the application submitted by the petitioner for appointment for the post of member of Permanent Lok Adalat, Rampur pursuant to the advertisement issued in the year 2021. Even otherwise the notification was issued only to invite application from qualified candidates for their recruitment and selection on the post in question and the candidate does not acquire any right to the post unless the relevant recruitment rules so indicate. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shankarsan Das Vs. Union of India reported in AIR 1991 SC 1612 has held that the notification merely amounts to an invitation to qualified candidates to apply for recruitment and on the selection, the candidate does not acquire any right to the post unless the relevant recruitment rules so indicate. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:- "7. It is not correct to say that if a number of vacancies are notified for appointment and adequate number of candidates are found fit, the successful candidates acquire an inde- WRIC No. 21502 of 2021 2 feasible right to be appointed which cannot be legitimately denied. Ordinarily the notifica-tion merely amounts to an invitation to qualified candidates to apply for recruitment and on their selection they do not acquire any right to the post. Unless the relevant recruit-ment rules so indicate, the State is under no legal duty to fill up all or any of the vacancies." 10. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that mere submitting application for the post of member of Permanent Lok Adalat, does not provide any legal right to the petitioner for her appointment and selection on the post in question, the petition lacks merits and the same is liable to be dismissed and the writ petition is hereby dismissed. The petitioner is free apply for the post of member as Permanent Lok Adalat as and when fresh advertisement will be published. September 11, 2026 saqlain WRIC No. 21502 of 2021 3 (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad