IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.799 of 2010 1. LILENDRA NR. YADAV S/O SRI JAGDISH YADAV R/O VILL- GODHAILA PANCHAYAT SAKARPURA BATONA, P.S. & DISTT. MADHEPURA 2. ARJUN RAM S/O LATE BASO RAM R/O VILL- BALUAHI, PANCHAYAT JHALARI, P.S. & BLOCK GWALPARA, DISTT. MADHEPURA 3. ASHOK RAM S/O SRI SURESH RAM R/O VILL & PANCHAYAT SALONI KALA, P.S. BILARIGANJ, BLOCK GWALPARA, DISTT. MADHEPURA 4. MD. NABBAS S/O LATE MD. ALI R/O VILL- SONBARSA TOLA, PANCHAYAT BHATKHORA BLOCK AND P.S. MURLIGANJ, DISTT. MADHEPURA 5. MD. IMTIYAZ S/O MD. USMAN ALLAM R/O VILL- SONBARSA TOLA, PANCHAYAT BHATKHORA, BLOCK AND P.S. MURLIGANJ, DISTT. MADHEPURA 6. LAL MOHAMMAD S/O LATE MD. JUMRATI R/O VILL- PIPERPATTA, PANCHAYAT TULSIBARI RAJPUR MALIA BLOCK AND P.S. AND DISTT. MADHEPURA 7. BISHNUDEO SINGH S/O LATE KUSHESHWAR PD. SINGH R/O VILL- LALPUR, P.S. & BLOCK SINGHESHWAR, DISTT. MADHEPURA 8. BANILAL RISHIDEO S/O MANGAL RISHIDEO R/O VILL- LALPUR SAROPATTI, P.S. & BLOCK SINGHESHWAR, DISTT. MADHEPURA 9. BIJAY KUMAR S/O BOWALAL MANDAL R/O VILL- LALPUR SAROPATTI, P.S. SINGHESHWAR, DISTT. MADHEPURA 10. MD. JABBAR S/O MD. SULEMAN R/O WARD NO. 24, MADHEPURA NAGAR PARISHAD, MOH- BHIRKHI, MISSION ROAD, P.S. & BLOCK & DISTT. MADHEPURA 11. TARUNDEO SHARMA S/O GUNESHWAR SHARMA R/O VILL- RAMPUR BASA PANCHAYAT BISBARI BLOCK AND P.S. GWALPARA, DISTT. MADHEPURA 12. KUNDAN KUMAR S/O SHRI DEO NARAYAN YADAV R/O VILL- BELAUKHARI PANCHAYAT SRI NAGAR, P.S. & BLOCK GHAILARH, DISTT. MADHEPURA 13. RUBI DEVI W/O MANOJ KUMAR R/O VILL- BELARI PANCHAYAT BELARI, P.S. & BLOCK- KUMARKHAND, DISTT. MADHEPURA 14. RANJAN DEVI W/O BIRBAL RAM R/O VILL- PURAINI PANCHAYAT PURAINI, P.S. SRI NAGAR, BLOCK- KUMARKHAND, DISTT. MADHEPURA 15. UMESH KUMAR YADAV S/O LATE GIRIBAL PD. MANDAL R/O VILL & PANCHAYAT SUKHASHAN (CHAKIA), P.S. & BLOCK & DISTT. MADHEPURA 16. MUKESH KUMAR S/O SHRI ARJUN SHARMA R/O VILL- BALUAHA PANCHAYAT BHATRANDHA PARMANPUR, P.S. & BLOCK GHAILARH, DISTT. MADHEPURA 17. SABITA DEVI W/O SANJAY KUMAR R/O VILL- PIPRAHI CHAKIA PANCHAYAT BARDAHA, P.S. & BLOCK GHAILARH, DISTT. MADHEPURA 2 18. DEEP NR. PASWAN S/O LATE PANCHU PASWAN R/O VILL- CHAMPA NAGAR PANCHAYAT GIDHA, P.S. SINGHESHWAR BLOCK- SHANKARPUR, DISTT. MADHEPURA 19. BINA KUMARI W/O PERMANAND YADAV R/O VILL- RAJPUR PANCHAYAT TULSIBARI RAJPUR MALIA P.S. & BLOCK & DISTT. MADHEPURA 20. PHUCHO MEHTA S/O LATE HARKU MEHTA R/O VILL- SHYAM PANCHAYAT PIR NAGAR, P.S. & BLOCK- GWALPARA, DISTT. MADHEPURA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-CHAIRMAN DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE 3. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER MADHEPURA 4. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER UDAKISHUNGANJ, DISTT. MADHEPURA 5. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER MADHEPURA 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MADHEPURA 7. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER UDAKISHUNGANJ, DISTT. MADHEPURA 8. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GHAILARH, DISTT. MADHEPURA 9. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SINGHESHWAR, DISTT. MADHEPURA 10. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GAMHARIA, DISTT. MADHEPURA 11. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MURLIGANJ, DISTT. MADHEPURA 12. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KUMARKHAND, DISTT. MADHEPURA 13. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GWALPARA, DISTT. MADHEPURA 14. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER BIHARIGANJ, DISTT. MADHEPURA 15. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER CHAUSA, DISTT. MADHEPURA 16. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PURAINI, DISTT. MADHEPURA 17. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER ALAM NAGAR, DISTT. MADHEPURA ----------- 02. 24.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners were empanelled for appointment as a P.D.S. dealer on 20.7.2008. Even 3 before they could be appointed, dealership agreement signed, the panel was cancelled on 20.8.2008. The petitioners appear to have woken up and filed this writ application nearly one and half years later on 13.1.2010. Fresh advertisement has also been issued on 4.8.2010. In the aforesaid facts, the principles of natural justice before cancellation of the panel shall also have no application. The submission on their behalf that even if there were irregularities in the selection of certain others, but not in their selection, the rightful selections could have been saved for appointment may have had its relevance, if the petitioners had come to Court within one year of the formation of the panel, explained to be the normal life of a panel in 2009 (11) SCC 448 (Man Singh Versus Commissioner, Garhwal Mandal, Pauri & Others). It is well settled law that mere empanelment creates no right to appointment as held in 1991 (3) SCC 47 (Shankarsan Dash Versus Union of India). The limited right that the petitioners may have had to press their case has also been wished away by them through their own negligent conduct. Learned counsel for the State submits that there can be any individual relaxation of the conditions 4 of the fresh Advertisement and, if the conditions stipulated still permit acceptance of applications then only the petitioners’ application can be accepted in response to the aforesaid Advertisement and not otherwise. Any consideration of the case of the petitioners shall adequately keep in mind that they were in fact earlier selected, and that there were no irregularities in their selection as is asserted on their behalf. The writ application is dismissed with the aforesaid observations. P.K. ( Navin Sinha, J.)