Ravindra Thakur And ANR v. District Selection Committee, Jamui And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5894 of 2016 ====================================================== 1.

Ravindra Thakur Son of Sri Narayan Thakur, Resident of Village - Kalyanpur, P.. Jamui, District - Jamui.

2.

Manoj Kumar Ram, S/o Raman Ram, Resident of Village - Kalyanpur, P.S. and District - Jamui.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

1.

District Selection Committee, Jamui through its Chairman cum District Magistrate, Jamui 2.

Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Divisional Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger. 4.

District Magistrate cum Chairman, District Selection Committee, Jamui. 5.

Nazarat Deputy Collector, Jamui.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Gp25- Mani Kant Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 21-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they had not applied for empanelment in the process of selection for Grade-IV post in the District. He submits that others, who also had not applied initially, were subsequently included in the panel/select list. It is his submission that one 'Kedar Tanti', whose name has been included at Sr. No. 250 in the select list (Annexure -A/1 to the counter affidavit filed in C.W.J.C.No.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2016 dt.21-11-2019 2/3 5865 of 2016) had also initially not applied , but, subsequently had been included in the panel.

The counsel for the State, referring to the averments made in the counter affidavit and from the Panel (Annexure -A/1 to the counter affidavit filed in C.W.J.C.No. 5865 of 2016)) points out that the said 'Kedar Tanti' was a person working since before and that there were specific orders in his favour in contempt proceedings. Such are not the facts in favour of the petitioners, and as such, they cannot claim parity with the said 'Kedar Tanti'. If the petitioners have not applied then, today, this Court is not inclined to issue a direction for their inclusion in the panel moreso, since the empanelment of the petitioners may cause prejudice to others.

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the Authorities should be directed to conclude the process of selection pursuant to the panel prepared on 16.10.2012 and revised from time to time, up till January 2013, expeditiously, so that vacancies may be advertised in the future to enable the petitioners' consideration.

The petitioners' would be at liberty to participate in the future process for appointment on Class-IV post as and when the same arises.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2016 dt.21-11-2019 3/3 The writ petition is disposed off with liberty to the petitioners as aforesaid.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shyambihari/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 03.12.2019 Transmission Date N/A