Niranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7479 of 2013 ===========================================================

1. Niranjan Kumar S/O Umesh Sharma R/O Village And P.O.-Puran, P.S.- Karpi, District- Arwal .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Principal Secretary Department Of Home (Police), Government Of Bihar, Patna

3. Director General-Cum-Inspector General Of Police, Bihar, Patna

4. Central Selection Board (Kendriya Chayan Parishad), Bihar, Patna (Constable Appointment) (Sipahi Bharti), Computer Bhawan Bailey Road, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Patna Through Its Secretary

5. The Secretary, Central Selection Board (Kendriya Chayan Parishad), Bihar, Patna (Constable Appointment) (Sipahi Bharti) Computer Bhawan, Bailey Road, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Thakur, Md. Imteyaz Ahmad, Advocate.

For the State : Mr. AC to AAG 8 For C.S.B.C. : Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Mr. Binod Kumar Mishra, Mr. Vivek Anad Amritesh, Advocate.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 29-04-2016 Heard the parties.

In the present writ petition, petitioner has applied for the post of constable. The examination was conducted by the Central Selection Board, Bihar, Patna where petitioner was declared successful in the written examination as well as in the physical test but appointment could not be made then he approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

A counter affidavit has been filed from which prima facie

Patna High Court CWJC No.7479 of 2013 dt.29-04-2016 it appears that present petitioner has filed two applications whereas notification prohibits for filing two applications by single candidate. Petitioner has submitted two applications form and thus, the candidature of the petitioner has been cancelled. Prima facie Annexures E and F which have been brought by the Board shows that petitioner has filed two applications which has been denied by the petitioner.

Such disputed question of fact cannot be adjudicated in this proceeding and prima facie the plea of Board appears to be genuine. This Court does not find any merit in the present writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Vinay/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 6.5.2016 Transmission Date