IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3793 of 2009 Ram Babu Singh Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 2/ 15/07/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner claims to be an „Ebjee Chaukidar‟ for more than a decade and asserts denial of salary. The respondents contend that the post of Chaukidar has become a government post since 1990. Advertisement was published in 2008. The petitioner never applied in response to the same. Paragraph-5(iv) and 9 of the counter affidavit state as follows:- “5(iv) That it is stated that so far the non- payment of wages claimed by the petitioner is concerned, he never made any representation to this effect before respondent No.2. It is stated that respondent No.2 has no hesitation to pay the admissible due to Petitioner after enquiry.” “9. That the statement made in Para 07 of the writ petition it is stated that if vacancy is advertised the petitioner is at liberty to apply. Since the petitioner did not apply during the vacancy of 2008 his appointment was not possible.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition may be disposed off in terms of the aforesaid paragraphs with directions to consider age relaxation and weightage for past work experience. 2 Those are policy matters for the employer to decide and not for the Court to dictate, but only observe. The writ application stands disposed in the aforesaid terms. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)