IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA In the matters of applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. CWJC No.10030 of 1997 1. NAGENDRA KUMAR SON OF RAM PRAVESH SINGH C/O. JAICHAND SINGH, ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT, BIHAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, PATNA UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, PATNA. 2. SAHDEO LAL SON OF SRI GOVIND LAL, VILLAGE & P.O. ROH, DISTRICT NAWADAH AT PRESENT RESIDIN AT C/O. SRI B. N. AUDDY, ANILA KUTIR, NEW GANDHI NAGAR, RANCHI-2. 3. MAHTAB HUSSAIN SON OF MD. ISHAQUE, EUMAX PHARMA, BRAMHAPURA, LAXMI CHOWK, MUZAFFARPUR. 4. ARVIND KUMAR SINGH SON OF SRI RAM SEVAK SINGH BEHYIND SHARDA MARKET, SANJAY CINEMA ROAD, MUZAFFARPUR. 5. BINOY KUMAR SINGH SON OF SHIVENDRA NARAYAN SINGH BEHIND SHARDA MARKET, SANJAY CINEMA ROAD, MUZAFFARPUR. 6. MITHILESH KUMAR SINHA SON OF SUCHIT NARAYAN SINGH SYNOCHEM LAB. BHIKHAN PURA, MUZAFFARPUR. 7. MAHENDRA PRASA SINHA SON OF GOKUL PD. SINHA EUMAX PHARMA, BRAMHAPURA, LAXMI CHOWK, MUZAFFARPUR. 8. PRIYAVRAT NARAIN YADAV SON OF LATE MOHAN LAL YADAV CHANAKYA PURI, ROAD NO. 2. M.I.T. MUZAFFARPUR. 9. NAGENDRA PRASAD SON OF SHIV NANDAN PRASAD C.B.I. ROAD, RAJGIR, NALANDA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH HEALTH SECRETARY GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE HEALTH SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, PATNA. 4. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATNA. -2- 5. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATNA. 6. THE OFFICER ON SPECIAL DUTY, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATNA. with CWJC No.10124 of 1997 1. SUNIL KUMAR JHA SON OF SRI HIRA NAND JHA RESIDENT OF VIDYAPURI, KANKARBAGH, P.S. KANKARBAGH, PATNA AT PRESENT WORKING AS FIELD EXECUTIE INDIAN DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICAL LTD. S.P. VERMA ROAD, PATNA. 2. NIRMAL KUMAR SON OF SRI JAGDISH THAKUR, 4 M/36, BAHADURPUR HOUSING BOARD COLONY, LOHIYANAGAR, P.S. AGAMKUAN, PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, PATNA. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATNA. 4. THE OFFICER ON SPECIAL DUTY, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATNA With CWJC No.10309 of 1997 1. CHANDRASHEKHAR SON OF LATE LALOO PRASAD MOHALLA NEWATI TOLA, TARBANNA HATA, NEAR MAHARAJGANJ, PATNA. 2. PREM SHANKAR PODDAR SON OF SURAJ NARAYAN PODDAR MOHALLA GURHATTA, P.O. JAHUGANJ, PATNA CITY. 3. CHITRANJAN KUMAR SINHA SON OF SRI RADHA KRISHNA SINHA SHREE ENTERPRISES, NEMA PLACE, EXHIBITION ROAD, PATNA. 4. MAHENDRA PRATAP CHOPRA SON OF SHREE I.C. CHOPRA, C-208, ASHOK NAGAR ROAD NO. 1, ARGORA RANCHI. 5. DHARAM CHAND PRASAD SINGH SON OF SRI JAMUNA PRASAD SINGH MOHALLA NANDINI PATH, WEST PATEL NAGAR, P.O. SASTRI NAGAR, PATNA 6. DEVENDRA KUMAR SON OF RAGHUBANSH MANI MALOHDUMPUR, DISTRICT JAHANABAD. -3- 7. KAMLESH KUMAR SHARMA SON OF SRI SIDH NATH SHARMA AT & P.O. LALA BHADASARA, P.S. DULHIN BAZAR, DISTRICT PATNA. 8. ASHUTHOSH KUMAR JHA SON OF SRI SHIV CHANDRA JHA , PARARI, VIA BANGAM, DISTRICT SAHARSA. 9. ANIL PRASAD SINGH SON OF SRI AKHILESHWAR PRASAD SINGH AT TOLE BABU KHUBA SINGH, P.O. ATHMAL GOLA, DISTRICT PATNA. 10. OM PRAKASH THAKUR SON OF KAMESHWAR THAKUR, LABH GAON, DISTRICT KHAGARIA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH HEALTH SECRETARY GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE HEALTH SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, PATNA. 4. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATNA. 5. THE OFFICER ON SPECIAL DUTY, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATNA. with CWJC No.10600 of 1997 NAVIN CHANDRA SON OF RAM CHANDRA PRASAD AT PRESENT CARE OF RAM CHANDRA PRASAD, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA SHIVAPURI NAR ABHAY CARBON FACTORY, P.S. SHASTRINAGAR, PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. THE STATE DRUG CONTROLLER, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 15, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 5. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, 15, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. -----------
For the Petitioners :- M/S. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey &
Banwari Sharma
-4-
For B.P.S. C. :- Mrs. Nilu Agrawal.
For the State :- A.C. to G.A. V
——
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
——–
A.K.Tripathi,J., All these petitioners were applicants pursuant to
advertisement no. 29/97 issued on 19.10.1997 which was
for holding of examination for filling up the post of Drug
Inspectors in the State of Bihar. According to the
petitioners, though process for filling up the posts had
been going on for many a decades but nothing tangible or
substantive was done by the respondent State except for
issuing advertisement which became a cause of action for
filing of these writ applications. Admitted position is that
all the petitioners were over age when the advertisement
was issued and that came in their way of participation in
the said examination. The petitioners moved the High
Court seeking exemption and permission to sit in the
examination despite the age bar coming in their way but
the High Court except for directing the Bihar Public
Service Commission to accept the form and fees and to
allow the petitioners to sit in the examination, nothing
-5-
more came to be done since the Court categorically
recorded that the results would not be declared without
the leave of the Court. Such an order came to be passed
for the first time atleast in one of the writ applications as
far back as on 5.1.1997.
The writ applications came to be admitted and
is now being taken up for final disposal in hearing in the
year 2010. The question which arises for consideration is
the kind of relief which can be granted to these petitioners
in the changed circumstance and the long passage of time
which has gone past.
One fact has been pointed out to the Court that
out of many petitioners, only four had qualified in the
written test but despite the best efforts made by them by
filing various interlocutory applications for further
direction with regard to declaration of their result and
their participation in the process of selection, no order
ever came to be passed by the Court. Keeping in view
the above fact, so far as the rest of the petitioners are
concerned the matter has become infructuous and dead
for them. Non passing of examination is curtains for
-6-
them so far as their claim for appointment is concerned.
Question with regard to the other four persons
who claim that they had passed the written examination is
being pressed now by the learned counsels. A direction is
sought on the respondents keeping in mind the fact that
there are still large number of vacancies pending and
which can be filled up by allowing the four persons who
had cleared their written examination to be considered
for appointment.
The argument may sound attractive, but the fact
is that mere passing of the written examination does not
give a right to these petitioners for appointment. There
are many other steps which are taken before a final merit
list is prepared and recommendation made for
appointment. The case of these four petitioners cannot be
treated in isolation.
Further keeping in mind that even when the
advertisement was issued in the year 1997, all these
petitioners were over age and the bar of age came in way
of the petitioners in the year 1997 itself. Now the age
bar has become a barrier in the last 12 years. Giving
-7-
them exemption in age on the basis of passing of their so
called written examination at this stage would be
misplaced and misdirected as there has to be some
correlation when the advertisement was made and the
relief for appointment can be granted. It is just a case
where the petitioners have missed the bus for whatever
reason and that cannot be undone by the Court at such a
belated stage. The argument made now is mere academic
and the Court is not inclined to pass any substantive order
in favour of the four candidates who have supposedly
passed the examination in the year 1998.
All these four writ applications are dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)
Patna High Court,
The 17th August, 2010
AMIN/ (N.A.F.R.)