IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.708 of 2010 1. RAJAN KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE BALBHADRA PRASAD SINGH R/O RATAULI, P.S.PIPRA,DISTT-SUPAUL Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE BIHAR, PATNA CUM AGRICULTURE , PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR P.P.M.CUM-NODEL OFFICER "AATMA', BIHAR,PATNA 4. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER KOSHI DIVISION , SAHARSA 5. THE JOINT DIRECTOR ,AGRICULTURE KOSI DIVISION , SAHARSA 6. THE D.M. CUM-CHAIRMAN 'AATMA', SUPAUL 7. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL AGRICULTURE OFFICER-CUM-PROJECT DIRECTOR 'AATMA', SUPAUL ----------- 3. 17.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Advertisement No. 2 /2007-08 was published inviting applications for appointment on the post of Stenographer, Accountant, Computer Operator and Orderly-cum-Chowkidar. On completion of the selection process a panel was prepared in which one Sumit Kumar Suman was placed at serial no. 1 of the panel for the post of Accountant and the petitioner was at serial no. 2. The petitioner questioned the placement of the other candidate at serial no. 1, in C.W.J.C. No. 13394 of 2009 on the ground that he did not possess the basic condition of eligibility. This Court noticed that there was already an enquiry report and directed 2 appropriate action to be taken in accordance therewith. A fresh order has been passed by the District Magistrate, Supaul on 5.1.2010 which is presently assailed. Learned counsel submits that no sooner that the person at serial no. 1 of the panel was found to be disqualified for lacking essential eligibility condition, the petitioner was the next eligible candidate to be appointed. Counsel for the State from the impugned order points out that a common advertisement was published for four posts and a common selection process hold. He invites the attention of the Court to Paragraph-4 of the impugned order to submit that the irregularity in the selection process was not confined to the wrong empanelment of the said Sumit Kumar Suman at serial no. 1 for the post of Accountant. In fact, the entire selection process was vitiated in view of the leakage of question papers and other irregularities leading to a decision much earlier on 5.5.2008 reiterated on 27.6.2008 to annul the entire selection process. It is submitted from the statements made in the counter affidavit that no appointment whatsoever has been made on any of the four posts in pursuance of Advertisement No. 3 2/2007-08. Mere empanelment creates no right to appointment. If the respondents are satisfied that their have been great irregularities in the process of selection vitiating the entire process for all the four posts and have passed appropriate orders upon materials on record to that effect with reasons, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order calling for interference. There is no merit in this writ application. It is accordingly dismissed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)