Posted On by &filed under High Court, Patna High Court - Orders.


Patna High Court – Orders
Rajesh Kumar & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 14 September, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
      Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12263 of 2011
1. Rajesh Kumar Sri Ramnath Singh Balughat near Jangli Mai
Ashtan, P.S-Town, P.O- Head Post Office
2. Santosh Kumar Mishra Braj Mohan Mishra C/O Jitendra Jha
New Coloney Balughat Road No.-3 Muzaffarpur, Bihar
3. Satyendra Kumar Late Bhuneshwar Choudhary Vill-Surjan
Pakri, P.O-Shitalpatti, P.S-Shiby Patti Via Minapur District
Muzaffarpur
4. Pritam Kumar Parmanand Kumar Vill-Sahbajpur,P.O-
Bhikanpur,P.S-Ahiyapur,Distt-Muzaffarpur
5. Pramod Kumar Baidhyanath Sahni Vill-Rusulpur(Vajid) P.O-
Bhikanpur Kothi , P.S-Ahiyapur, Distt-Muzaffarpur
6. Mirtunjay Kumar Sri Maheshwar Pd. Verma Moh.-
Akharaghat Road,Behind Sudma Milk Palour Verma Tuit
,Tution Centre Muzaffarpur
7. Sarmendra Kumar Roy Bipin Kalyanpur Bhaya Runi
Saidpur, P.S-Aurai,Distt-Muzaffarpur,Bihar
8. Harsh Bardhan Chandra Kishore Singh Moh-Balughat Brahn
Asthan Near Suman Kirana Store Muzaffarpur, Bihar
9. Raul Kumar Jai Prakash Tiwari Moh-Berain Niwas Near Of
Sri Ram Mandir, Balughat, Muzaffarpur
10. Krishna Kumar Pandey Dinesh Kumar Pandey Vill-
Dharampur,P.O-Dharmar,Distt-Bhojpur
11. Mukesh Kumar Rajeshwar Singh Moh-Amma Niwash New
Area Sikandarpur Near Prabhat Zarda Factory Muzaffarpur,P.S-
Town Muzaffarpur,Distt-Muzaffarpur
12. Sheonandan Sahani Kishundeo Sahni Vill+P.O-Chauki,
District-Begusarai
13. Ajit Kumar Kaushal Kishore Bassundhi Moh-New Colony
Balughat Muzaffarpur,P.S-Town Muzaffarpur,Distt-
Muzaffarpur
14. Mukesh Kumar Ram Kant Prasad C/O Ram Babu Singh
Chhatauni Bazar Motihari,P.S-Town Motihari,Distt-East
Champaran
15. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Sri Shambhu Prasad Vill+P.O-
Pataura,Lala Tola,P.S-Mufasil Motihari Dist- East Champaran--
------------------------------------------------Petitioners
                               Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary Department Of
Home, Patna
2. The Secretary Department of Personal and Administrative
Reforms, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
3. The Director General of Police Bihar, Patna
4. Bihar Staff Selection Commission Bihar, Patna through Its
Secretary
5. The Chairman Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Bihar,
Patna
6. The Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Bihar,
Patna ----------------------------Respondents
                 ----------------------------------

2

2 14.9.2011 Petitioners are the candidates who applied against vacant

post for recruitment, which was to be carried out by the State of Bihar.

Appointment related to 299 posts of Sub-Inspectors of Police through

direct recruitment, which was to be done through what is known as

Staff Selection Commission.

After selection process writ applications came before the

High Court alleging many a things. The issue did not rest at the High

Court but travelled to Hon’ble Supreme Court as well. A decision in

the case of Arvind Kumar Etc. Etc. vs. State of Bihar and other

analogous case came to be rendered on 2.2.2011. This decision is

reported in 2011 (3) PLJR 136 (SC).

Submission of counsel for the petitioners is that

petitioners should be treated in the same fashion as the Hon’ble

Supreme Court treated other candidates and even his claim should be

considered when a fresh exercise for written and physical tests is held.

In the normal circumstances, the Court would have had no

difficulty in allowing such a prayer because all similarly situated

persons have been given chances after intervention of the Court but

there is limitation on this count because of the observation of the

Apex Court in para-6 of the said decision. Para-6 of the said decision

is quoted herein below:

” In the peculiar facts and circumstances of these
cases, we direct the Bihar Staff Selection Commission
to hold fresh examinations for the 299 posts of Sub-
Inspectors of Police and only the appellants, who were
writ petitioners, before the High Court of Judicature
at Patna, whose cases were adjudicated upon or are
pending before the High Court (total 223 only as per
the list given in Court by Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned
Senior Counsel) would be at liberty to appear in the
physical and written examinations. ”

3

Petitioners have approached the High Court only after the

decision had been rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as writ has

been filed on 28.7.2011. As liberty has been granted to limited

persons to the dispute as per the observation of the Supreme Court,

case of petitioners do not come within the ambit of the said decision.

If this writ had been filed prior to passing of the order by the Apex

Court, petitioners may have had a case. Any indulgence with regard to

the claim of the petitioners will have to come from the Apex Court

and not by this Court.

Writ therefore is dismissed. Petitioners may approach the

Hon’ble Supreme Court on this issue in light of the observation

contained in para-6 quoted above.

( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)
RPS


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

8 queries in 0.122 seconds.