Muzaffar Nasim v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1088 of 2015 ====================================================== Muzaffar Nasim Son of Late Md. Quasim, Resident of Village - Bandua, P.O. - Matpa, Via - Amba, P.S. - Kutumba, District - Aurangabad (Bihar). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Staff Selection Commission, Bihar, Patna through its Secretary, Staff Selection Commission, Bihar, Patna.

4. The Secretary, Staff Selection Commission, Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shakib Ayaz For the Respondent/s : AC to GP - 10 Sri Chandra Bhushan Das ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-02-2017 Heard Mr. Ankit Katriyar, learned counsel, assisted by Sri Shakib Ayaz, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AC to GP No. 10 as well as Sri Chandra Bhushan Das, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the Staff Selection Commission / respondent no. 3 and 4.

The petitioner, has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , with a prayer to direct the respondents to consider his second application which was submitted by him under Extreme Backward Class Category pursuant to Advertisement No. 210 of 2010.

At the time of argument learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CWJC No.1088 of 2015 (4) dt.09-02-2017 2/2 petitioner confines his prayer to the extent of directing the Secretary, Staff Selection Commission, Bihar , Patna / respondent no. 4 to examine the representation of the petitioner which is Annexure - '8' to the present writ petition and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

In view of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner , there is no reason to keep matter pending. The writ petition stands disposed of with observation that the respondent no. 4 may take appropriate decision in accordance with law on the representation of the petitioner i.e. Annexure - '8' to the writ petition (running page no. 26). Such decision may be taken preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this court has not recorded any opinion on the merit of the case.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U