Manju Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 7497 of 2015 ====================================================== Manju Devi, D/o Late Prabhu Chaudhary, resident of Village - Kazifattucha, PS - Barbigha, District - Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1 The State Of Bihar through the Director General of Police (Home Guard), Bihar, Patna 2 The Inspector General of Police, Patna 3 The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Sheikhpura 4 The District Magistrate, Sheikhpura 5 The Superintendent of Police, Sheikhpura 6 The Commandant, Bihar Home Guard, Sheikhpura 7 The Chairman, Selection Board, Home Guard Selection, Sheikhpura ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Yugal Kishore, Sr Advocate with Mr Vinod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Tripurari Nath Ambastha, AC to SC XXVI ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 14-05-2019 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent-State. 2 Petitioner had participated in the process of selection for the posts of Constable and Home Guards. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner has wrongly been disqualified in the process of selection of account of award of 0 mark in all the three events, i e, high jump, long jump and short put events. 3 It is asserted that petitioner should have been granted higher marks. The self-serving statement of the petitioner are sought to be supported by saying that if the CCTV Footage from

Patna High Court CWJC No.7497 of 2015 dt.14-05-2019 2/2 the camera fixed at the selection ground is examined then it would show that the petitioner has qualified.

4 Learned Senior Counsel is not able to show any provision which requires the assessment of the physical test by virtue of the CCTV Footage from a camera installed near or on the selection ground. Petitioner has been subjected to uniform selection process wherein assessment has been done on the basis of uniform criteria. Result of the selection process (Annexure B to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents No 4 and 6 shows the petitioner to have obtained 0 marks in all the three events. There is no infirmity in the process of selection nor any infirmity has been alleged by the petitioner. 5 Writ petition has been filed only saying that petitioner, on the basis of CCTV Footage, would be declared as a selected candidate. Such claim of the petitioner is not worthy of consideration.

6 Writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 22.05.2019 Transmission Date NA