IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7018 of 2009 Deepak Kumar, Son of Sri Vijay Kumar Bhagat, resident of Banmankhi, P.S.-Banmankahi, District-Purnea. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. Life Insurance Corporation of India through its Chairman, Yogakshema, Jeevan Bima Marg, Mumbai. 2. The Zonal Manager, East Central Zone, L.I.C., Patna. 3. The Senior Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, L.I.C., Bhagalpur. -Respondents. ----------- 02 29.07.2009 The petitioner had applied for Apprentice Development Officer (A.D.O.) with the Life Insurance Corporation of India Limited (hereinafter referred to as L.I.C.), in response to advertisement issued by L.I.C., Bhagalpur Regional Office in this regards. There were about 50 such vacancies. In the first list of written test-cum-interview petitioner did not qualify, he was put in contingency list, which is akin to waiting list. It is not disputed that five persons did not join even after their medical examination. All persons from the contingency list including petitioner was then noticed to appear for medical examination, as he had already qualified in the written test-cum-interview. Petitioner in the mean time left Patna and moved to Banmankhi. He did not get this communication as he had not informed L.I.C. about any such change. On one of the visits to Patna soon after he got the letter from his ex-landlord he immediately rushed to Bhagalpur Regional Office and tried to persuade them to take his medical test and induct him in service as it was question of his bread and butter and survival. The same was not accepted. This is what has brought the petitioner to this Court. Petitioner submits that on the 26th February, 2009 he was to - 2 - submit himself for medical examination at Bhagalpur. He got this information only on the 20th of March, 2009 and on 23rd of March 2009 he represented at Bhagalpur. As per the counter affidavit, it is stated that at the end out of 50 likely numbers of posts 48 including the entire contingency list have been taken into account. In view of the Court leaves two vacancies unfilled. It is not in dispute that out of 50 posts advertised, only 48 have been filled up, there still remains two vacancies, as per the advertisement. It had not been disputed that petitioner being to the category of OBC and there specifically being unfilled post of OBC, petitioner submits that his appointment could have been accepted. In the counter affidavit, primarily the only ground taken for denying the petitioner the opportunity of employment is that it would entail a lot of administrative hassles as the recruitment process is finished. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that the theoretical training is of two weeks followed by in house apprenticeship training about two months. All these by now have been completed otherwise petitioner’s qualification and selection is not disputed. Having heard the parties and with their consent the writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself. Here, in my view, is a question of survival of the petitioner as against hassles for a corporate giant like L.I.C. These two conflicting interest have to be balanced. The answer can only be in one direction, specially, keeping in view the scarcity of employment in these days. Petitioner, it is not disputed, had duly qualified on merit, a position for OBC still remains unfilled. The only thing that was that the petitioner - 3 - could not be turned up for the medical test and is now told that as the training programme is also over nothing can be done. In my view, these special facts call for a special treatment. It is not that the appointment process has to be reopened or upset. The in house theoretical training is only of two weeks apart from practical job exposure of about two months compared to the loss which this petitioner never would suffer. The inconvenience (practical hassles) to the corporate giant like L.I.C. would be minimal. Thus, balancing the two as a Court of equity as well, this Court directs L.I.C. to accept the joining of the petitioner, on petitioner being medically qualified and would be treated as a regularly selected Apprentice Development Officer, though his seniority would reckoned from the date of his present joining. With these observations and directions, the writ petition is allowed. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)