Patna High CourtL.P.A/1460/2013dismissed

Anil Kumar Chaudhary v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-02-28Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1460 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8588 of 2013 ===========================================================

1. Anil Kumar Chaudhary S/O Shri Sheshnath Chaudhary Resident Of Village - Lal Chapra, P.S. Adapur, District - East Champaran At Motihari .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through The Secretary, Department Of Energy, Bihar, Patna

2. The Chief Area Manager, Patna Area Office, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 1st Floor Shashi Bhawan, Exhibition Road, Patna - 1 .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Murari Narain Chaudhary For the IOC : Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha Mr Amlesh Kr. Verma Mr Ankit Katriar For the State : Mr Satya Prakash, AC to SC 22 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 28-02-2017 Heard counsel for the appellant and counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation.

Appellant was one of the candidates, who was shortlisted for appointment as a Distributor for LPG under what is known as RGGLV scheme. Based on the declaration made with supporting evidence, evaluation of the appellant was made and marks were awarded. However, on actual field verification, many a discrepancies emerged with regard to land, with regard to income etc. etc. and ,

Patna High Court LPA No.1460 of 2013 dt.28-02-2017 2/2 therefore, the total marks awarded to the appellant, which was 85, had to be scaled down. Not only that since it was mis-declaration between what was stated in the application and what was actually available in reality, by virtue of Annexure- 5 to the writ application, they decided to annul the selection, which became the subject matter of challenge. The finding of the learned Single Judge is not belied by any materials, which are available in the memo of appeal, and since those findings are not erroneous, the conclusion cannot be said to be erroneous either.

Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) sk AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 01.3.2017 Transmission Date NA