Chitranjan Kumar v. Bihar Staff Selection Commission,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2798 of 2021 ====================================================== Chitranjan Kumar S/o - Sri Yogendra Singh R/o - Vill- Garbhuchak P.O. - B.V. College, P.S. - Hawai Adda, Patna- 800014. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna through its secretary, B.V College Campus, Patna - 800014.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Rai, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 10-10-2023 1.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that he has not been granted weightage for experience of having worked in the Lok Nayak Jayprakash Narayan Hosptial (for brevity 'LNJN Hospital'), Rajbanshi Nagar, Patna from 01-04-2006 till 15-06-2016. It is his grievance that in the process of selection of Lab Technician conducted pursuant to Advertisement issued in January 2015 (Annexure- 11), the persons who were having experience of working on the post of Lab Technician were granted five points for every year of
2/4 experience subject to maximum of 25 points. The petitioner, though has worked for ten years has been denied weightage, which is unsustainable in view of the fact that his experience has been certified by the Director LNJN Hospital on 15-062016 and further clarified by the Director on 01-06-2020. 3.
The respondents have taken a stand that he has not completed even a year in the contractual establishment as Lab Technician in the LNJN hospital. He thus cannot claim any weightage on the ground of experience.
4.
The stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit is based on the certificates produced by the petitioner in the instant writ proceeding. From bare perusal of the certificate dated 15-06-2016, it is apparent that he was certified as having worked on honorarium basis between 0104-2006 to 30-12-2009; and as an Auto Analyzer in between 29-03-2014 to 30-05-2015. His contractual appointment as Lab Technician is on 01.06.2015 as per certificate dated 1506-2015 issued just few days before date of advertisement. It is not a contemporaneous certification.
5.
Stand of the respondents, in the opinion of this Court appears to be valid from bare perusal of the certificate produced by the petitioner dated 15-06-2016. This certificate
3/4 which was produced by the petitioner in the process of selection, prima facie from a plain reading, certifies that the petitioner was appointed as Lab Technician on contractual basis only on 01-06-2015.
6.
As per the advertisement, petitioner is entitled to experience only for the period he worked as Lab Technician on contractual basis. The petitioner, therefore, cannot claim any weightage for any other work, during any other periods mentioned in the certificate dated 15-06-2016. It is apparent from the certificate that the period prior thereto was without any payment and on honorarium basis and cannot be said to be an experience in the contractual establishment of the hospital. 7.
The assessment criterea of the inter se experience claimed by the candidates in the process of selection has to be uniformly applied to all who participate in the process of selection. If the requirement is not fulfilled, as per the advertisement, as in the instant case, candidate/s cannot be given any weightage by the respondents. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to exercise discretionary writ jurisdiction to pass any orders on the petitioner's claim for experience of the work he has performed, other than the period of his contractual experience, i.e., from 01-06-2015.
4/4 8.
Writ petition is thus dismissed.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) Raj kishore/- U