IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.708 of 2010
1. RAJAN KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE BALBHADRA PRASAD SINGH
R/O RATAULI, P.S.PIPRA,DISTT-SUPAUL
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY
BIHAR, PATNA
2. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE BIHAR, PATNA CUM
AGRICULTURE , PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER, BIHAR, PATNA
3. THE DIRECTOR P.P.M.CUM-NODEL OFFICER "AATMA',
BIHAR,PATNA
4. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER KOSHI DIVISION , SAHARSA
5. THE JOINT DIRECTOR ,AGRICULTURE KOSI DIVISION ,
SAHARSA
6. THE D.M. CUM-CHAIRMAN 'AATMA', SUPAUL
7. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL AGRICULTURE OFFICER-CUM-PROJECT
DIRECTOR 'AATMA', SUPAUL
-----------
3. 17.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and the State.
Advertisement No. 2 /2007-08 was
published inviting applications for appointment on
the post of Stenographer, Accountant, Computer
Operator and Orderly-cum-Chowkidar. On
completion of the selection process a panel was
prepared in which one Sumit Kumar Suman was
placed at serial no. 1 of the panel for the post of
Accountant and the petitioner was at serial no. 2.
The petitioner questioned the placement of the other
candidate at serial no. 1, in C.W.J.C. No. 13394 of
2009 on the ground that he did not possess the
basic condition of eligibility. This Court noticed that
there was already an enquiry report and directed
2
appropriate action to be taken in accordance
therewith. A fresh order has been passed by the
District Magistrate, Supaul on 5.1.2010 which is
presently assailed.
Learned counsel submits that no sooner
that the person at serial no. 1 of the panel was found
to be disqualified for lacking essential eligibility
condition, the petitioner was the next eligible
candidate to be appointed.
Counsel for the State from the impugned
order points out that a common advertisement was
published for four posts and a common selection
process hold. He invites the attention of the Court
to Paragraph-4 of the impugned order to submit that
the irregularity in the selection process was not
confined to the wrong empanelment of the said
Sumit Kumar Suman at serial no. 1 for the post of
Accountant. In fact, the entire selection process was
vitiated in view of the leakage of question papers and
other irregularities leading to a decision much earlier
on 5.5.2008 reiterated on 27.6.2008 to annul the
entire selection process. It is submitted from the
statements made in the counter affidavit that no
appointment whatsoever has been made on any of
the four posts in pursuance of Advertisement No.
3
2/2007-08.
Mere empanelment creates no right to
appointment. If the respondents are satisfied that
their have been great irregularities in the process of
selection vitiating the entire process for all the four
posts and have passed appropriate orders upon
materials on record to that effect with reasons, this
Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned
order calling for interference.
There is no merit in this writ application.
It is accordingly dismissed.
P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)