Raushan Kumar Mishra v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4050 of 2015 ====================================================== Raushan Kumar Mishra Son of Sri Virendra Mishra Resident of VillageArer Dih, P.s. - Arer Hat, Distict- Madhubani .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Personnel, Government of India, New Delhi.

2. Staff Selection Commission (CR) , 8, AB, Bailey Road, Allahabad (U.P) through its Regional Director.

3. The Regional Director, Staff Selection commissioner(CR) , 8 AB, Bailey Road, Allahabad(U.P)

4. The Deputy Director, Staff Selection Commission(CR) , 8AB, Bailey Road, Allahabad (U.P)

5. The Deputy Inspector General , Group Centre, CRPF, Amethi, .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binodanand Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, ASG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 08-05-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application is confined to consideration of his case for appointment on the post of Constable (General Duty) in CRPF in terms of the advertisement dated 5.2.2011 and the recommendation for selection dated 3.6.2012.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after the petitioner was declared medically unfit he had sought review of such decision and the Review Medical Board after examining the petitioner at Delhi and Allahabad had declared him to be medically fit but the petitioner was yet not considered for

Patna High Court CWJC No.4050 of 2015 (5) dt.08-05-2015 appointment only on medical ground. In this regard he has referred to a communication of the Staff Selection Commission dated 1.10.2014, as contained in Annexure 9.

Learned counsel for the respondents having obtained instruction and in fact in presence of an authorized representative of the Staff Selection Commission has taken a stand that as a matter of fact some of the candidates including the petitioner were found subsequently fit in the medical examination and therefore, their cases are under consideration. He has also made it clear to this Court that the petitioner is medically fit and now his case for appointment will be considered strictly in accordance with law. In view of the aforementioned stand of the learned counsel for the respondents in presence of the representative of the Staff Selection Commission, Allahabad this Court would direct that the case of the petitioner must be considered and finally decided one way or other within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order.

With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/- U