Sameer Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10699 of 2023 ====================================================== 1.

Sameer Sharma Son of Ram Vilash Sharma, Resident of M.I.G. 343, Lohiya Nagar, Kankarbagh, P.O.- Lohiya Nagar, P.S. Kankarbagh, District- Patna. 2.

Rohit Kumar Choudhary Son of Rambali Choudhary, Resident of VillageBela, P.O. Lakhshuna, P.S. Punpun, District- Patna. 3.

Abhishek Ranjan Son of Mahendra Prasad, Resident of A-45, Mata Khudi Lane, Mata Ki Mandir, Mahendru, P.O. Mahendru, P.S.- Sultanganj, DistrictPatna. 4.

Amit Kumar Son of Dudheshwar Prasad, Resident of Adarsh Nagar, Nokha, P.O. and P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas.

5.

Manoj Kumar Son of Rambachan Ram, Resident of Police Colony, Lane No. 03, Gola Road, Danapur, P.O. Danapur Cantt., P.S. Danapur, District- Patna. 6.

Harkesh Kumar Son of Lalbabu Prasad Chaurasia, Resident of Chhawahi Takki, P.O. Gopalganj, P.S. Manjha, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Patna. 2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director General cum-Chairman - Cum - Managing Coroporation, Near B.M.P.-5 Campus, Kautilya Nagar, Patna-14.

4.

The Secretary, Bihar Police Building Construction Corporation, Near B.M.P.-5 Campus, Kautilya Nagar, Patna-14.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC-8 For BPBCC :

Mr. Prasoon Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 10-10-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State, as well as learned counsel for the respondent-Bihar Police Building Construction Corporation (hereinafter referred as "Corporation").

2. The petitioners are claiming weightage in the

2/4 matter of selection on contractual basis in terms of advertisement dated 24.03.2023 (Annexure-P/9 to the writ petition).

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners' selection in the respondentCorporation was in compliance with resolution dated 18.07.2007 on fulfilling the requisite qualifications and after following the procedure. They, therefore, are required to be given weightage in the matter of contractual employment afresh by the notification.

4. Reliance is placed on clause (4) of the resolution dated 22.01.2021.

3/4 (ii) किय अनियुरूप संशयोधिनि किर नलियमा जमायगमा। परन्तयु (i) उकत विनणर्मित उम्र सकीमिमा मिमें नशनरलिकीकिरण एविसं किमायर्मि अनियुभवि किय आधिमार पर ननियुनकत मिमें अनधिमिमानितमा किमा लिमाभ नसफर्मि उसकी पद पर ननियनमित ननियुनकत किय समिय नदयमा जमायगमा नजस पद पर संनविदमा ननिययोजनि किय तहत किमायर्मि नकियमा गयमा हयो। (ii) जहपाँ तकि अनियुभवि किय आधिमार पर अनधिमिमानितमा किमा प्रश ह, अनधिमिमानितमा दयतय समिय अनधिकिकत नविननियमामिकि संस्रमाओसं अरविमा नविश्वनविदमालिय अनियुदमानि आययोग, एविसं अनखिलि भमारतकीय तकिनिकीकिकी नशकमा पनररद आनद दमारमा ननिधिर्धानरत मिमागर्मिदशर्मिनि कियो ध्यमानि मिमें रखिनिमा आविश्यकि ह। दपूसरय शब्दयों मिमें नजनि मिमामिलियों मिमें इनि अनधिकिकत नविननियमामिकि संस्रमाओसं किय दमारमा गय मिमागर्मिदशर्मिनि लिमागपू हैं उनिमिमें ननियुनकत किकी ययोग्यतमा एविसं अनधिमिमानितमा आनद मिमागर्मिदशर्मिनि किय अनियुरूप हकी हयोगकी। (iii) परन्तयु यह भकी नकि उम्र सकीमिमा मिमें नशनरलिकीकिरण किमा लिमाभ विहसय मिमामिलियों मिमें निहहीं नदयमा जमा सकियगमा, जहपाँ किमानिपूनि / ननियुनकत ननियमिमाविलिकी किय तहत उसकिकी अनियुमिनत नि हयो। उदमाहरण किय नलिए पयुनलिस किकी ननियुनकत अरविमा किई अन्य मिमामिलियों मिमें उम्र सकीमिमा मिमें नशनरलिकीकिरण किकी अनियुमिनत किमानिपूनि / ननियुनकत ननियमिमाविलिकी निहहीं दयतमा ह। अततः ऐसय मिमें उम्र सकीमिमा मिमें नशनरलिकीकिरण किमा लिमाभ दयय निहहीं हयोगमा।"

5. It is quite obvious that the clause being relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioners speaks of giving weightage to existing contractual employees in the matter of regular employment. The petitioners are not seeking weightage in a process of regular employment. It is not in dispute that the advertisement in question is for appointment on contractual basis. Therefore, no case is made out by the petitioners for invoking the extra ordinary and discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4/4

6. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shashank/- U