Urmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.649 of 2023 ====================================================== Urmila Devi Wife of Jyoti Shankar Prasad, Resident of Village - Pataura, Mathiya Tola - Kaswa, Police Station - Motihari Muffasil, District - East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

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

2.

The Director General of Police, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari. 4.

The District Superintendent of Police, East Champaran, Motihari. 5.

The In-Charge Officer, District General Branch, East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Manish Kumar, GP-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-03-2023 No one appears for the petitioner.

Mr. Manish Kumar, learned GP-4 appears for the State.

On perusal of the writ application, it appears that the petitioner is seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to consider her for appointment on the post of Chaukidar.

The facts as disclosed in the writ petition would reveal that there was an advertisement bearing no. 01/2017 for the appointment of Chaukidar. The petitioner who belongs to the "Extremely Backward Class" applied for the same and she was called for counseling vide letter dated 05.07.2018 (Annexure

Patna High Court CWJC No.649 of 2023(2) dt.18-03-2023 2/2 '1'). It is her case that she appeared in the counseling held on 28.07.2018 but she was not selected. In this regard, she has made representation as contained in Annexures '3' and '4' to the writ application.

It is evident from the statements made in the writ application itself that the counseling had taken place as back as on 28.07.2018. The petitioner has approached this Court after more than four years.

In these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ application as by this period, the process of appointment under the advertisement in question has already come to an end.

This application is dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) lekhi/- U