IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13276 of 2009 RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- CWJC No.13277 of 2009 SUMAN KUMAR SUMAN & ANR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 13.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners seek consideration of their appointment on the post of Constable against advertisement no. 1 of 2004 and advertisement no.2 of 2004. It is their contention that after a process of selection, they qualified and had been selected. The foundation for this assertion of fact is Annexure-6 to the writ application. The document states that it was in context of advertisement no. 1 of 2004 only calling the specified candidates for physical examination only. It is, therefore, clearly not a select list. Factual foundation for the assertions of selection is, therefore, completely wanting in the writ petition. The writ petition does not state on what date they appeared, what was the marks secured by them and who with lesser marks came to be appointed. This Court is, therefore, satisfied that the writ application is completely wanting on facts and essentially seeks a roving inquiry into the claim . This Court is not persuaded to do so. The next submission is for a direction to dispose the 2 writ application in terms of an order of this Court at Annexure-8 dated 30.7.2009. If the petitioners file a representation before the authorities making adequate disclosure of their selection with proof of empanelment, panel position and the selection of those below them in the panel or of persons with lesser marks, only in that event, this Court requires the Respondents to dispose of the representation by a reasoned and speaking order preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such representation from the petitioner. The writ application stands disposed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)