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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1634 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.

Ajay Kumar and Anr Son of Tapshi Singh, Resident of VillageBhagwanpur, P.O.- Masadpur, P.S.- Parashi, District- Arwal 2.

Rishikesh Kumar, son of Jagdish Narayan Singh, R/O VillageParshurampur, P.O.- Hirdyachak, P.S.- Kaler, District- Arwal ... ... Petitioners

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Govt. of Bihar Patna 2.

The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna 3.

The Deputy Inspector General Human Rights, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Chairman, Police Selection Board, B.M.P.- 5 5.

The Chairman, Police Selection Board, B.M.P.- 10 ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bindeshwari Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC 9 Mr. Sushant Praveen, AC to SC 9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 13-11-2019 The order-sheet reveals non appearance on behalf of the petitioners on the last two dates. Today when the matter is called, Counsel for the petitioners seeks a pass over. Counsel for the respondent State submits that the petitioners have asserted a right to be appointed as Constable on account of having been declared pass in the process arising out of Advertisement No. 1 of 2004.

The result, on the basis of which petitioners claim appointment, is said to have been reworked under the orders of Division Bench of this Court passed in LPA No. 831 of 2009

Patna High Court CWJC No.1634 of 2015(4) dt.13-11-2019 2/2 and MJC No. 1516 of 2013.

The said fact is not disputed by Counsel for the petitioners, who only submits that certain matters have been filed before the Apex Court also against the order passed in the said LPA.

If any rights accrue to the petitioners by virtue of decision in the other cases pending before the Apex Court, the petitioners would be elegible anyway to avail of the said right. In so far as the instant proceedings are concerned, in view of the decision of the Division Bench, taken note of hereinabove, the petitioners have no enforceable claim. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U