Ramni Raman Rakesh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7480 of 2016 ====================================================== Ramni Raman Rakesh, Son of Hirday Paswan, Resident of village- Agaiya, P.O.- Chhatinaki, P.S.- Sanokhar, District-Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna

3. The Chairman, Central Selection Board of Constable, Patna, Bihar

4. The Secretary, Central Selection Board of Constable, Patna, Bihar

5. The Officer on Special Duty, Central Selection Board of Constable Patna, Bihar .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : None For the Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, AC to GA 9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 05-07-2018 None appears on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, learned AC to GA 9 appears for the State. Perused the records.

The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to appoint him on the post of Constable.

Pleadings on record would confirm that the petitioner has successfully completed the selection but at the stage of verification of documents that certain doubts arose and the selection of the petitioner was put on halt. On a representation filed that the petitioner was informed by the Officer on Special Duty, Central Selection Board, Bihar, Patna vide letter dated 20.01.2016 that on allegation regarding the petitioner trying to

Patna High Court CWJC No.7480 of 2016 (2) dt.05-07-2018 secure appointment for committing forgery that Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 226/15 was instituted against him under sections 417, 419, 420/34 IPC on 22.06.2015 and it is by virtue of institution of such criminal case that he has been held ineligible for appointment. The same situation is reflecting from the second letter dated 05.02.2016 of the Central Selection Board. Be that as it may, considering the statement of the petitioner that he was successful in the selection process and it is at the stage of verification of documents that doubts have been raised, while not interfering of the decision of the respondent Selection Board as manifest from the letter dated 20.01.2016 and 05.02.

2016 at Annexures 8 and 9 respectively to the writ petition which discusses the reasons therefor, I deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition with the direction to the Central Selection Board to consider the claim of the petitioner in case he succeeds in the criminal case for a doubt raised by the respondents, if not substantiated, the right if any, vested in the petitioner for the claim raised herein can not be diluted by passage of time. The writ petition is disposed of with the direction aforementioned.

(Jyoti Saran, J) Archana/Surendra U