Md. Saba Karim Khan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3508 of 2023 ====================================================== Md. Saba Karim Khan Son of Md. Takrim Khan, Resident of village- Piru, Apiru, P.S. Haspura, District- Aurangabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Under Secretary cum Nodal Officer, Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society, State Rural Livelihoods Mission Bihar. 4.

The Executive Officer, Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society, State Rural Livelihoods Mission Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhishek Anand, Advocate Ms. Madhuri Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to AAG-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-08-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner claims to have participated in a selection process for selection of District Consultant (SLWN).

3. The examination, as per the averment made in the writ petition, took place in December 2019 and the merit list was published on 17-06-2020. In the merit list, the petitioner's name is stated to be figuring at serial No. 23.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that being the first wait-listed candidate, the petitioner has not been selected. He further submits that vacancies still subsist;

Patna High Court CWJC No.3508 of 2023(5) dt.17-08-2023 2/2 and therefore, a direction should be issued for the petitioner's selection.

5. The writ petition does not contain the advertisement or the rules under which the selection was being carried out. What is the nature of selection cannot be deciphered from the readings in the writ petition.

6. It is also not the case of the petitioner that anyone below him in the final merit list has been selected or appointed.

7. In view thereof, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition as it suffers from insufficiency of pleadings. The Court would also observe that no case is made out merely because the petitioner's name figures at serial No. 23 or for issuing a direction for his selection in 2023, with reference to an alleged final merit list prepared in 2020.

8. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SUMIT/- U