IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3121 of 2011 Abha Kumari, wife of Rakesh Kumar, resident of Anathalaya Road, P.O. and P.S. and District- Katihar….. . Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2. The Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Executive Director, State Health Society, Bihar. 4. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Health Society, Katihar 5. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Member Secretary, District Health Society, Katihar. 6. The District Programme Manager, District Health Society, Katihar…………… Respondents. For the petitioner: Dr. Kislay, Advocate Mr. Prabhakar Singh, Advocate Mr. Kailash Chandra Choudhary, Advocate Mr. Jyoti Ranjan Jha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Nasrul Huda, Khan, S.C.18 Md. Irshad, A.C. to S.C. 18. For Respondent No.3: Mr. K.K. Sinha, Advocate ---------------------------------- 3. 29.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsels for the State and the State Health Society. The petitioner has approached this Court for setting aside the advertisement (Annexure-1) issued by the District Health Society, Katihar, by which the shortlisted candidates were invited for interview on the post of Hospital Manager and District Planning Coordinator, which was to be held on 28.8.2010 in which the petitioner 2 was not selected and further to cancel the appointments and entire selection process made in the light of the aforesaid advertisement and to appoint the petitioner on the post of Hospital Manager. Pursuant to an earlier advertisement on 26.6.2010, the petitioner applied for the post of Hospital Manager and thereafter, an interview was held in which her position was at serial No.1 in the merit list. However, it appears from the materials on the record that the officers of the State/District Health Society discovered that the appointments had not been done in terms of the instructions issued by the State Health Society, which provides for the candidates to appear for proficiency test in computer and they again issued an advertisement dated 24.8.2010 directing the shortlisted candidates to appear for interview on 28.8. 2010. Pursuant to the re-interview and holding of computer proficiency test, the petitioner could not find place in the merit list and others were placed at the top for the purpose of appointment. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached this Court. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of 3 respondent Nos. 4 and 5, it is stated that since the matter has become one year old and no appointment has been made pursuant to the same because of the faulty procedure, the appointment process has been cancelled. Learned counsels for the State and the State Health Society submit that the entire appointment process has been cancelled and a fresh advertisement is going to be issued shortly for contractual appointment on the said post, and therefore the writ petition is fit to be dismissed, as nothing remains to be decided in the matter. On a consideration of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is also of the view that once the appointment process itself has been cancelled and the cancellation of the appointment process is not under challenge, then no direction can be issued in the matter. For the said reason, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the authorities are directed to ensure that if any fresh advertisement is issued, they shall clearly state the necessary eligibility criteria either directly or by referring to any website or brochure in which all the details regarding eligibility criteria, etc. are available and 4 further the marks that may be allotted for different criteria may also be clearly laid down so that no suspicion of bias or favourtism is entertained with regard to the process of appointment. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)