IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16385 of 2009 1. AJIT KUMAR RAM S/O RANG LAL RAM R/O VILL.- CHAUMUKHA, P.S. PACHRUKHI, DISTT.- SIWAN 2. SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV S/O RAM BALAK YADAV R/O VILL.- LUHASI KHURD P.S. SIWAN MUFFASIL, DISTT.- SIWAN 3. SANJAY YADAV S/O HARI LAL YADAV R/O VILL.- LUHASI KHURD P.S. SIWAN MUFFASIL, DISTT.- SIWAN 4. RAVINDRA YADAV S/O AMARNATH YADAV R/O VILL.- PAKWALIA P.S. MAHARAJGANJ DISTT.- SIWAN 5. MANJAY YADAV S/O DEO LAL YADAV R/O VILL.- OJHA BADHEYA P.S. JIRADEI DISTT.- SIWAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (D.G.P.), GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CUM COMMANDANT, HOME GUARD, PATNA 4. THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SIWAN 6. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (S.P.) SIWAN 7. DISTRICT COMMANDANT HOME GUARD, DISTT.- SIWAN 8. DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER, DISTT.- SIWAN ----------- 2. 8.1.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The controversy relates to the question whether the petitioners meet the age eligibility for appointment of 19 years as on 1.1.2006. The maximum permissible age is not relevant to the present controversy. Learned counsel for the State has rightly pointed out that the entire writ application contains no material with regard to the age of the petitioner much less any documentary evidence in support of the same when in a writ petition documents are primary evidence. The application is disposed with the observation 2 that if the petitioners file a representation before the authorities annexing documentary evidence in support of their claimed date of birth to urge that they fulfil the requirement of minimum age of 19 years on 1.1.2006, let such representation be disposed by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)