IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11059 of 2001 DR.CHITTARANJAN SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4/ 22-Sep-08 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Director, K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute, Respondent No,4 and learned counsel for Mrs.Sharad Kumari, Respondent No.7. Petitioner has challenged the selection of Respondent No.7 as Research Scholar under the K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute. Admittedly, the Research Scholars selected by the Institute receive scholarship for two years at a prescribed rate. The selection of Respondent No.7 was made on 27.8.2001 and counsel for the Respondent No.7 submits that now Respondent No.7 is no longer continuing as Research Scholar and she ceased to be a Research Scholar in the 2 year 2004 itself. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that some fowl methods were adopted by the Selection Committee consisting of four persons and as a result the petitioner was wrongly shown to be No.4 candidate and Respondent No.7 was wrongly selected as the first candidate although she had not done her post graduation in Modern Indian History but only in International Affairs as the special paper. In the counter affidavit and in additional counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent No.4, an attempt has been made to explain that special paper of International Affairs also relates to Modern History era and therefore the Selection Committee considered the Respondent No.7 as an eligible candidate for scholarship. The attempt has also been made in the counter affidavit to show that one member of the Selection 3 Committee was interested in continuing the petitioner as a Research Scholar only on the basis that petitioner had continued as a Research Scholar on account of successive selection for about eleven years. Considering that the period of scholarship has expired and other facts and circumstances, this Court is not persuaded to interfere in the matter. It is also not found to be a fit case for grant of compensation of Rs.48,000/- as claimed by the petitioner’s counsel. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed on account of the fact that the period of scholarship is already over. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)