Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13010 of 2008 ====================================================== 1. Umesh Kumar Yadav, S/o-Late Bhumi Yadav, resident of village- Bailahi, P.O.-Pakiya, P.S.-Bihra, District-Saharsa. 2. Manoj Kumar, S/o-Sri Chandeshwari Yadav, resident of village- Mankhahi, P.O.-Makuna, P.S.-Bihra, District-Saharsa. 3. Sujit Kumar, S/o-Sri Ramdeo Yadav, resident of village-Gangapati, P.O.-Kathwansi, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul. 4. Balbant Kumar, S/o-Sri Raj Kishore Yadav, resident of village-Bhelwa, P.O.-Aran, P.S. & District-Saharsa. 5. Anil Kumar, S/o-Sri Taleshwar Prasad Yadav, resident of village & P.O.-Rakiya, P.S.-Bihra, District-Saharsa. 6. Abhay Kumar Munna, S/o-Sri Bishwanath Prasad Yadav, resident of village-Mahua, P.O. & P.S.-Ghailadh, District-Madhepura.
Legal Reasoning
7. Pramod Kumar Yadav, S/o-Sri Chhabu Yadav, resident of village- Mankhahi, P.O.-Makuna, P.S.-Bihra, District-Saharsa. .... .... Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat Building, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director General of Police, Old Secretariat, Building, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Additional Director General of Military Police, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Inspector General of Police (Head Quarter and Administration), Bihar Patna. 5. The Additional Director General of Police, Muzaffarpur Zone, Muzaffarpur. 6. The Inspector General of Bihar Military Polcie, Patna. 7. The Deputy Inspector General of Bihar Military Police, North Zone, Muzaffarpur. 8. The Commandant, Bihar Military Police-12, Saharsa (Camp. Katihar). .... .... Respondents. WITH Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18284 of 2008 ====================================================== 1. Ganesh Kumar, son of Sri Chhitan Prasad Yadav, resident of village & P.O.-Bhatrandha, P.S.-Ghailardh, District-Madhepura. 2. Manoj Kumar Ram, S/o-Sri Brahmadeo Ram, resident of village- Parmanpur, P.O.-Bhatrandha, P.S.-Ghailardh, District-Madhepura. 3. Bijendra Kumar, S/o-Sri Baidyanath Prasad Yadav, resident of village & P.O.-Bhatrandha, P.S.-Ghailardh, District-Madhepura. 4. Shiv Shankar Kumar, S/o-Sri Bisheshwar Prasad, resident of village- Ghopa, P.O.-Bhatrandha, P.S.-Ghailardh, District-Madhepura. 5. Balram Kumar, S/o-Sri Thithar Yadav, resident of village & P.O. Khadipur, P.S.-Bihra, District-Saharsa. 6. Arjun Ram, S/o-Sri Bindeshwari Ram, resident of Parmanpur, P.O.- Bhatrandha, P.S.-Ghailardh, District-Madhepura. 7. Sadanand Ram, S/o-Sri Ram Kishun Ram, resident of village- Parmanpur, P.O.-Bhatrandha, P.S.-Ghailardh, District-Madhepura. .... .... Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat Building, Bihar, Patna. Patna High Court CWJC No.13010 of 2008 (02) dt.10-07-2013 - 2 - 2. The Director General of Police, Old Secretariat, Building, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Additional Director General of Military Police, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Inspector General of Police (Head Quarter and Administration), Bihar Patna. 5. The Additional Director General of Police, Muzaffarpur Zone, Muzaffarpur. 6. The Inspector General of Bihar Military Polcie, Patna. 7. The Deputy Inspector General of Bihar Military Police, North Zone, Muzaffarpur. 8. The Commandant, Bihar Military Police-12, Saharsa (Camp. Katihar). WITH Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18867 of 2011 ====================================================== 1. Mukesh Kumar, S/o Sri Ramadhar Dubey, resident of Village- .... .... Respondents. Mohanchak, P.O.-Akhtiyarpur, P.S.-Bikram, District-Patna. 2. Gajendra Kumar Singh, S/o Late Deo Pujan Singh, resident of Village- Painapur, P.O.-Vajirpur, P.S. Bikram, District-Patna. Versus .... .... Petitioners. 1. The State of Bihar through Commissioner, Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. the Principal Secretary-Cum- 2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Inspector General (Human Rights), Bihar, Patna. 4. The Chairman, Central Recruitment Board-Cum-Additional Inspector General, S.C.R.B., Bihar, Patna. 5. The Chairman, Constable Selection Board, Board No. 3, Magadh Region, Gaya. 6. The Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad. .... .... Respondents. ====================================================== Appearance : (In CWJC No.13010 of 2008) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : AAG-V. (In CWJC No.18284 of 2008) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lalan Kr.Singh For the Respondent/s : SC-10 (In CWJC No.18867 of 2011) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Ranjan, AC to SC-XI. Mr. Ram Suresh Singh, AC to AAG-XV. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH ORAL ORDER 02 10-07-2013 The petitioners who are applicants, pursuant to advertisement nos.01, 02 & 03 of 2004, for recruitment of police constables in Bihar Police, Bihar Military Police and Government Patna High Court CWJC No.13010 of 2008 (02) dt.10-07-2013 Rail Police. They have not yet been appointed though they - 3 - alleged that they are liable to be selected. Having heard the learned counsels for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and with their consent these three
Decision
writ petitions are being disposed of at this stage itself. In my view, the matter now stands settled by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case Ajay Kumar & Ors. Versus the State of Bihar & Ors. and analogous cases, being L.P.No.831 of 2011 & analogous cases disposed of on 28.06.2011 since reported in 2011 (3) PLJR 575. The issue in the present case is that petitioners being applicants for the post of constables in Bihar Military Police-12, even though there are substantial vacancies unfulfilled and they are not disqualified, they have not been appointed. It is pointed out that without filling up the vacancies in 2009 fresh advertisements have been issued including these unfulfilled vacancies. It is under similar circumstances that earlier writ petitions were filed which came to be disposed of by Division Bench judgment, as above noticed. The Division Bench in categorical terms held that all the vacancies in different police forces that where there up to the advertisement that was issued in the year 2004 had to be filled up by the panel prepared pursuant to the 2004 advertisement. There could be no justifiable reason for Patna High Court CWJC No.13010 of 2008 (02) dt.10-07-2013 not filling up those vacancies. First with regard to the - 4 - advertisements issued in the year 2009, the Division Bench clearly said that they could not take into account vacancies which had to be filled up by the 2004 advertisements. Thus, effectively the advertisement of the year 2009 would cover vacancies from 2004 onwards only and could not have vacancies of the earlier period added to it. It seems the Division Bench has given State six months time to fill up the vacancies as per the 2004 advertisements. Petitioners are some of the persons who are still left out. It is not in dispute that for the 2004 advertisements there still remains unfulfilled vacancies. They have remained vacant not because qualified/eligible people could not be found. They remained unfulfilled because lot of people was either issued selections letters which they did not receive or having received did not join. Learned counsel for the petitioners points out that pursuant to directions contained in the Division Bench aforesaid data was collected by the police department with regard to vacancies which were required to fill up by the 2004 advertisements. This has been circulated to all police districts vide Memo dated 04.02.2011 where district wise, branch wise available vacancies have been shown in respect of B.M.P.-12. It is shown that in all there are 178 posts still lying vacant to be filled up by Patna High Court CWJC No.13010 of 2008 (02) dt.10-07-2013 the advertisement of the year 2004. If that be so then in - 5 - accordance with the judgment of the Division Bench aforesaid these 178 posts have to be filled up by people who had been empanelled pursuant to the advertisements issued in this regard in the year 2004 and petitioners being some of them. I, accordingly, direct the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna to ensure proper and immediate compliance of order of this Court as well as the Division Bench order passed earlier because any further delay in implementing the same would create unnecessary complications. It may also be noted that any further delay may not be conducive either to the Government or the employee concerned because almost 10 years have already gone by and the selection process has not yet ended. It is expected that within one month from today the case of petitioners would be considered by the respective Boards and appropriate action taken in this regard. With these observations and directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. Trivedi/- (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)