IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.9386 OF 2004 GAURI SHANKAR THAKUR, SON OF SHRI BHUALI THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MOHAMMADPUR, POLICE STATION KESARIA, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN. AT PRESENT, POSTED AS CLERK, HIGH SCHOOL, MUKHLISPUR, POLICE STATION BANJARIA, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN ……………………………………………………………………………….PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY EDUCATION, BIHAR, INTERMEDIATE COUNCIL BHAWAN, BUDH MARG, PATNA ………………………………………………………………………………RESPONDENTS ********** 3 03/12/2010 Counsel for the petitioner relies on the rule contained in Annexure-1 by which 5 per cent quota has been fixed for the purpose of promotion of Class-IV employees to Class-III posts. An advertisement was issued in the year 1996. The petitioner duly applied against the said advertisement and was issued interview letter on 23.03.2000. The counter affidavit reveals that a merit list of 98 persons was prepared by the Vidaylaya Sewa Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Board’) and sent for approval to the Education Department. The department rejected the claim on two grounds. It is firstly stated that the said advertisement was made without any further requisition by the Board and that the candidates did not possess the required qualification. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that 2 the petitioner appeared in the said interview against the Advertisement No. 01 of 1996 after receiving a call letter from the Board. The merit list was prepared after the interview was held. It is further emphasized on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has requisite qualification being B.Sc Trained. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, it is thus contended that the State Government should not have outright rejected the merit list prepared by the Board without considering the individual cases of the candidates. Being aggrieved by the orders of the department, several writ applications were filed. One of the writ applications was CWJC No. 6976 of 2003 (Ram Kumar Singh & Others vs. State of Bihar & Others) which was disposed of on 17.09.2003 by this Court with a direction to the writ petitioners to file a representation which was to be considered by the department. It has been stated on behalf of the State at paragraph 5 that after the order passed in CWJC No. 6976 of 2003, the representation of the writ petitioners was considered and rejected by a reasoned order vide memo no. 160 dated 27.02.2004. It is apparent that the petitioner was not a party to CWJC No. 6976 of 2003 and had thus not filed any representation and could not also bring to the notice of the authorities the fact that he was duly qualified and 3 eligible to be considered for promotion on the basis of the 5 per cent quota rule. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that his case is distinguishable from the cases of the other persons on this ground alone. Counsel for the State submits that the order passed vide memo no. 160 dated 27.02.2004 has been considered by this Court in a subsequent writ application and has been dismissed. However, the order is not before this Court, and as observed by me earlier, the petitioner was not party to that writ application and his case was not considered by the department. I, accordingly, direct that the Director, Secondary Education, Bihar should consider the case of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation by the petitioner. If it is found that the petitioner is duly qualified, and his case is not covered with the findings of the Committee (issued vide memo no. 160 dated 27.02.2004), then the petitioner may be considered for promotion from the date of his entitlement. If the petitioner has crossed the age bar, it may be relaxed in the special facts of this case. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )