Patna High CourtCWJC/6124/2008dismissed

Mukesh Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-03-19Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6124 of 2008 ======================================================

1. Mukesh Kumar , son of Sri Bateshwar Yadav, resident of villageMilkychak, P.O. Janki Nagar, P.S. Naya Ram Nagar, District- Munger

2. Madan Kumar, son of Sri Rajo Prasad Yadav of village- Mahrana, P.O. Dharhara, P.S. Dharhara, District- Munger .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The D.G.-cum- I.G. of Police, Bihar, Patna

3. The D.I.G. of Police, Central Range, Patna

4. The S.P. Nalanda-cum- Constable Selection Committee, Patna

5. The City S.P.Patna-cum- Member Constable Selection Committee, Patna

6. The Senior S.P., Patna-cum- Chairman, C.S.G, Patna .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Teg Bahadur Singh Mr. Nirmala Kumari Mr. Purnendu Nr.Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to AAG-3 =============================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER ........................

19-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AC to AAG-3.

The petitioners, invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for directing the Respondents to appoint them on the post of constable in Central Range.

Fact remains that for the post of constables, an advertisement was made in the year 1998 and result was finally published in the year 2000. However, after about eight years, the

Patna High Court CWJC No.6124 of 2008 (3) dt.19-03-2015 2/2 present writ petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the State submits that after advertisement of 1998, several other advertisements were made and appointment has already been made.

In view of the fact that the petitioners approached this Court much belatedly, there is no reason to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition stands dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U