Krishandeo Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2328 of 2019 ====================================================== Krishandeo Prasad Yadav, son of Kaushaer Yadav, resident of villageKhakhai Gram, Ward No. 2, P.O- Kadampura, P.S- Kishanpur, DistrictSupaul (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Secretary, Labour Employment and Training Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.

Commissioner, Koshi Division, Saharsa 3.

District Magistrate, Saharsa 4.

Deputy Collector, Establishment, Saharsa ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Mukund, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sarvesh Kumar (GP-24) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 17-02-2025 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned Advocate for the State.

2. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court seeking a direction upon the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner on Class-IV post by including his name in the recently prepared list of the year 2018 wherein the name of the petitioner, to his knowledge, did not find place.

3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the persons junior to the petitioner, who has been placed at serial no.177 in 2014 panel, finalized in March, 2017, was duly considered ignoring the claim of the petitioner. Placing reliance upon an order of this Court passed in M.J.C. No. 2778 of 2017 it has contended that once a person was duly considered for

Patna High Court CWJC No.2328 of 2019 dt.17-02-2025 2/2 appointment under any advertisement by no subsequent Rule or Resolution of the Government, they can be ousted from the zone of consideration.

4. Learned Advocate for the State contended that the life of a panel is only one year and once new panel is prepared, the earlier panel lost its efficacy, unless directed otherwise. Moreover, for the purpose of selection and appointment on Class-IV posts, new rules have also been notified.

5. Considering the nature of the grievance, based upon the aforesaid facts, this Court does not find any merit in the present writ petition. However, if the case of the petitioner is confined that the persons, junior to the petitioner in the panel has been accorded appointment, the petitioner shall be at liberty to place his case before the authority concerned along with the supporting documents.

6. The writ petition stands disposed off with the liberty aforesaid.

(Harish Kumar, J) uday/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 24.02.2025 Transmission Date NA