Willingness for appointment expires upon candidate’s express refusal and failure to utilize subsequent opportunities.

The applicant qualified for the post of Technician Grade-III under recruitment notification CEN-01/2018.

A provisional appointment letter dated 17.03.2020 was issued, directing him to report by 14.04.2020.

The applicant failed to join, later claiming that the Covid-19 pandemic and resultant lockdown prevented receipt of the letter and timely reporting.

The respondents produced an application dated 30.07.2020 signed by the applicant, wherein he explicitly requested cancellation of his candidature due to domestic problems and stated he would be unable to join in the future.

Despite this, the department issued further opportunities on 03.09.2020 and 09.02.2021, which the applicant failed to utilize.

The applicant approached the Tribunal in 2022 seeking a mandamus to permit him to join duty based on his original 2020 appointment letter.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to a direction for appointment after having explicitly declined the offer and failed to respond to subsequent opportunities granted by the department.

Principle of administrative fairness and the voluntary abandonment of candidature.

Evidentiary value of an applicant’s own written withdrawal of interest, which estops the party from claiming the right to the same post subsequently, especially after the employer has acted upon such withdrawal by returning the candidate's dossier.

The Tribunal noted that while the applicant initially blamed the Covid-19 lockdown for his non-joining, the evidence showed that the respondents acted with significant "liberal approach" by granting multiple extensions even after the lockdown relaxed.

Crucially, during the hearing, the applicant admitted to the genuineness of the letter dated 30.07.2020 in which he had formally declined the post.

The court reasoned that since the applicant himself requested the cancellation of his selection and failed to appear for document verification despite reminders in February 2021, no negligence could be attributed to the respondent department.

The court found that the department’s decision to return the applicant's dossier on 09.06.2022 was a direct consequence of the applicant’s own repeated failures and explicit refusal to join.

The Original Application was dismissed, and all associated Miscellaneous Applications were disposed of with no costs.