IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.188 of 2009 Bharat Wagon and Engineering Company Limited, having its registered office at Block-L, Maurya Lok Complex (fifth floor), Dak Bungalow Road, P.s. Kotwali,Patna through its Managing Director. Versus 1. Shiv Sankar Kumar, son of Late Ram Bharose Singh, resident of Shekhpur, P.O. Shekhpur, Ahiyapur, via Ramna, District Muzaffarpur. 2. The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises, New Delhi. 3. The Chairman cum Managing Director, Bharat Bhari Udyog Nigam Ltd., 26, Raja Santosh Road, Alipore, Kolkata. 4. The Director (Personnel & Administration), Bharat Bhari Udyog Nigam Ltd., 26, Raja Santosh Road, Alipore, Kolkata. 5. The Deputy Manager (legal), Bharat Bhari Udyog Nigam Ltd. Raja Santosh Road, Alipore, Kolkata. 6. The Incharge (Personnel & Administration), Bharat Wagon & Engineering Company Limited, Muzaffarpur., ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. Udayan Chaudhary For Respondent No. 1 : M/S. Gautam Bose, Sr. Advocate, & Ratna Das For Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha. -------- 4 02/07/2009 Heard the parties. The gist of submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant is that the writ petitioner, since he was working as an Accounts Assistant in Bharat Wagon & Engineering Company Limited, could not have applied as a candidate from the open market and was un-qualified to apply as an employee of the Company in view of the general condition no. 2 of the advertisement. - 2 - On going through the advertisement we find that there is no bar that an employee of Bharat Bhari Udyog Nigam Ltd., the holding Company, which issued the advertisement or an employee of its four subsidiary Companies for whom also recruitment had been initiated, could not have applied except as departmental candidate so as to be governed by general condition no. 2. Even the general condition no. 2, as appearing in the advertisement, does not apply to the case of the writ petitioner because it, prima facie, appears to govern only persons from public sector undertakings or government service who may apply for deputation. However, even if that clause is made applicable to those working in government/ semi government/ public sector/ autonomous bodies who may apply for recruitment instead of deputation, the condition requires this special category of applicants to apply through proper channel or produce no objection certificate at the time of interview only if they have worked for atleast two years in the next below grade. The writ petitioner was not having two years experience in the next below grade and, hence, this condition did not apply to him. - 3 - He was not working in any private sector and, hence, even the last sentence in general condition no. 2 did not apply to the writ petitioner. In our considered opinion, the writ petitioner could not have been denied the appointment after being successful in the selection process on the grounds urged. We find no illegality or infirmity in the order of the writ Court. The Letters Patent Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. If the order of the writ court has not been complied with so far, then it should be complied with without any delay and in any case within six weeks. (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Anjana Prakash, J.) AMIN