Ajit Kumar Yadav, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23846 of 2019 ====================================================== Ajit Kumar Yadav, S/O Sri Ramchandra Yadav, Resident of VillageDharahara P.O.- English, P.S.- Mairawa, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner.

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Director General of Police, Police Head Quarter, Old Secretariat, Patna, Bihar.

3.

The Chairman Police Selection Board, Saran Regional Board Saran. 4.

The Chairman Police Selection Board, Patna Regional Board Patna. 5.

The D.I.G. Saran.

6.

The D.I.G. Patna.

7.

The S.P., Saran.

8.

The S.P., Patna.

... ... Respondents.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Manish Kumar ( GP-4 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 03-12-2019 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. By filing the present writ application, the petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing the writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Constable in the Bihar State Police.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the Advertisement No.1 of 2004 regarding the recruitment of the Constable in the Bihar State Police, the

Patna High Court CWJC No.23846 of 2019 dt.03-12-2019 2/2 petitioner had applied for the post of Constable and he successfully qualified all physical tests but he was not selected at that time. At present, some posts in the Bihar State Police, in all categories, are still vacant.

4. Learned counsel for the State submits that after 2004, on several occasions, the Constables in the Bihar State Police have been recruited and, as such, no question regarding the unfilled-up vacancy, as detailed in Advertisement No.1 of 2004, arises.

5. The petitioner has filed the present writ application after 15 years without assigning any reason.

6. I find no reason to entertain the present writ application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Pradeep Srivastava/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 03.12.2019.

Transmission Date NA