IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12897 of 2008 DR.PRASHANT KUMAR VERMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr Akash Deep, Adv. For respondent no. 5 :- Mr. Dhrub Narayan, Sr. Adv. Mr. O.P. Agrawal, Adv. For the State:- Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, G.A. Mr. Uday Bhan Singh, Adv. ----------------- 4. 5.5.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the State and for private respondent no. 5. The controversy in this case relates to the issue of merit- cum-seniority and choice posting thereupon. The final seniority list in the department of medicine has been issued by the respondent State on 8.7.2008. The petitioner is admittedly senior to respondent no. 5. That being the admitted position, the respondents are required to consider the case of the petitioner vis-à-vis respondent no. 5 in light of the Full Bench judgment of this Court reported in 2006(1) PLJR 737 read with the Bench decision following the same in C.W.J.C. No. 14012 of 2003 and analogous cases disposed on 23.5.2008 as also in C.W.J.C. No. 14162 of 2003 disposed on 30.8.2006 and C.W.J.C. No. 13853 of 2003 disposed on 15.1.2007 inclusive of the scope for executive Ministerial interference with the same. Let the State respondents take a final decision with regard to the petitioner and respondent no. 5 on the issue of merit-cum- seniority, choice posting in light of the law laid down by this Court in - 2 - the background of the admitted seniority of the petitioner within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before respondent no. 2. The respondent no. 2 shall grant personal hearing to the parties if a request be made. Let the final decision be reasoned and speaking so that, if necessary, judicial review be facilitated. It shall be open for the parties to place any further materials that they may wish before respondent no. 2. It is made clear that the issue has to be decided based on the rules and regulations as existing on the date that the respondents invited applications and the petitioner and respondent no. 5 applied. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)