IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4836 of 2007 SURENDRA KUMAR, SON OF LATE RAGHO SARAN PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KAPATIYA, P.S. NALANDA DISTRICT NALANDA. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF CULTURE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, SHASHTRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, NAVA NALANDA MAHA VIHARA, MANAGEMENT BOARD OFFICE AT RAJ BHAWAN PATNA. 3. DR. RABINDRA PANTH, DIRECTOR NAVA NALANDA MAHA VIHARA, NALANDA, DISTRICT NALANDA. For the petitioner : M/s. Md. Khurshid Alam(N.P.), Rupak Kumar, Advocates. For the Union : Mr. S.N. Pathak, Advocate. For the Chancellor : Mr. Shivendra Kishore, Advocate. ----------- 03. 02.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Union of India. 2. Petitioner has questioned the validity of the appointment of respondent no.3 on the post of Director, Nava Nalanda Mahavihar(hereinafter referred to as the Mahavihar) on the ground that he is not qualified to hold such post. 3. Counsel for the Union, on the other hand, submitted that appointment of respondent no.3 on the post of Director, Mahavihar was challenged in C.W.J.C. No.9434 of 1999 which was dismissed under orders dated 11.10.2006, against which L.P.A. No.930 of 2006 was filed which was also dismissed under orders dated 27.7.2007 observing that respondent no.3 was appointed on the post of Director, Mahavihar by conducting selection process, which is well known to law and respondent no.3 was the most suitable candidate available for the post of Director. Finding of this Court in regard to the suitability - 2 - of respondent no.3 for the post of Director will also mean that he is qualified for the said post. 4. In view of the findings recorded by the Division Bench of this Court that respondent no.3 is the most suitable candidate available for the post of Director, I am not inclined to reconsider the matter in the present writ petition, which is dismissed. It may, however, be mentioned here that against the order dated 27.7.2007 passed in L.P.A. No.930 of 2006, Special Leave to Appeal(Civil) No(s).1478 of 2008 is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as is evident from order dated 26.11.2010 passed in the said Special Leave to Appeal(Civil). It goes without saying that the appointment of respondent no.3 on the post of Director, Mahavihar shall be subject to the result of Special Leave to Appeal(Civil) No(s).1478 of 2008. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)