Vimla Devi And ANR v. The Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12258 of 2017 ===========================================================
1. Vimla Devi, Wife of Late Birendra Kumar Pandit, resident of MohallahMohammadpur, P.O.- Mahendru P.S.- Sultanganj, Town & District- Patna- 800006 (Bihar).
2. Neeraj Kumar, Son of Late Birendra Kumar Pandit, resident of MohallahMohammadpur, P.O.- Mahendru P.S.- Sultanganj, Town & District- Patna- 800006 (Bihar).
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Director General, Prasar Bharti, New Delhi.
2. The Chief Engineer (Civil) Civil Construction Wing, All India Radio, 6th Floor, Soochna Bhawan, Lodhi Road, Khan Market, New Delhi.
3. The Superintending Engineer (Civil), Civil Construction Wing, All India Radio, Doordarshan Bhawan, 4th Floor, Golf Green Kolkata.
4. The Station Director, All India Radio, Patna.
5. The Additional Director General (P) (EZ), Prasad Bharti, All India Radio, Patna.
6. The Deputy Director (Engineering), Office of Additional Director General (P) (EZ), Prasad Bharti, All India Radio, Patna.
7. The Executive Engineer (Civil), Prasad Bharti Broadcasting Corporation of India, Office of Executive Engineer (Civil) CCW, All India Radio, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. M.P. Dixit, Adv. Mr.S.K.Dixit, Adv.
Mr.S.K. Chaubey, Adv.
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Sunil Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.D Sanjay, Addl. S. G. Mr.Satyabrat Verma, CGC =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 18-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Solicitor General for the Union of India. Since there is mathematical formula which has been
Patna High Court CWJC No.12258 of 2017 dt.18-09-2017 adopted for working out the eligibility and necessity for grant of compassionate appointment and the last person with 85 marks had been recommended for appointment. Petitioners have earned only 64 points. The marks awarded were never challenged and assailed. The allegation and insinuation against the selection is only a clever ploy for getting appointment rather than any infirmity in the scientific manner of the assessment, which has been laid down by the D.O.P.T. The dismissal of the O.A. in no manner is required to be interfered with by interference in the writ. Writ is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Arvind/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 19.09.2017 Transmission Date