MEMORANDUM.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the court's memorandum ( 132 A.D.2d 905). We do not condone the practice of the Department of Civil Service, itself charged with State-wide administration of the statutes at issue here, of filling "temporarily vacant" positions on its own staff on a provisional basis, when it concededly has no intention of ordering the examination unambiguously mandated by Civil Service Law § 65 (2). The Department's questionable practice cannot, however, result in a permanent appointment for petitioner when there is no basis in law for converting his provisional appointment to a permanent one.
Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE and HANCOCK, JR., concur; Judge BELLACOSA dissents and votes to reverse in another memorandum.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
BELLACOSA, J. (dissenting).
I respectfully dissent and vote to reverse and grant the petition for the reasons stated in the dissenting memorandum by Presiding Justice A. Franklin Mahoney at the Appellate Division ( 132 A.D.2d 905, 907). I note especially, however, my concurrence in that part of the majority's memorandum questioning what I would characterize as the evasive misconduct of the Civil Service Commission's own personnel management policy towards its employee in this case — an unacceptable irony inflicted by the very agency charged with administering civil service protections State-wide.