IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7351 of 1996 1. Mithilesh Kumar Prasad, son of Shri Rajendra Prasad, resident of Mohalla Gewal Bigha, Police Line Road, Durga Asthan, near Post Office, Gaya, District Gaya 2. Renu Kumari, D/o Sri Maya Kant Verma, resident of Mohalla Panchmahalla (Sarlahigali), District Gaya 3. Nagendra Prasad, son of Dr. Arun Kumar Prasad, resident of Heera Kunj, 307, Anugrahpuri Colony, District Gaya 4. Md. Mazahir Masoon, son of Md. Yunus, Mohalla Sahmir Takiya (near Masjid Gali), P.O. Chandchoura, P.S. Civil Lines, District Gaya 5. Om Prakash, son of Sri Ram Pratap Sharma, Prakash Commercial Institute, Chand Choura, District Gaya 6. Hira Lal Kumar, son of Shri Mathura Nishad, resident of Mohalla Malachak, P.O. and District Jehanabad 7. Kamlesh Kumar, son of Sri Sitaram Prasad, resident of Mohalla Malachak, P.O. & District Jehanabad 8. Ramesh Singh, son of Sri Ganga Singh, resident of village Marna, P.O. Imgora, District Jehanabad 9. Pankaj Kumar, son of Sri Saroj Kumar, residing at Qr.No. 44B, Railway Colony, Jehanabad, District Jehanabad 10. Gowardhan Prasad, son of Sri Jageshwar Lal, at present resident of village Bareo, P.O. Nemdarganj, District Nawada 11. Rizwan Ahmad, son of Abdul Razaque, resident of Mohalla Manitola, P.O. Dorando, District Ranchi 12. Sanjiv Kumar, son of Sri Upendra Prasad Sinha, Convent School, Sutapatty, Muzaffarpur 13. Ramesh Kumar Roy, son of Munsi Lal Roy, resident of Mohalla Sarihaganj, P.S. Malsalami Patna City, District Patna 14. Sanjay Kumar, son of Sri Sudarshan Pandey, resident of Choti Patan Devi Lane, District Patna 15. Sanjay Kumar, son of Sri Narbdeshwar Prasad, resident of Shekhpura (Beli Road), P.O. B.V.College, Patna 16. Premchand Bharti, son of Sri Yogendra Prasad, residing at in front of Pranami Mandir, Kagibagh, Gulzarbagh, Patna 2 17. Ranjan Kumar Jayaswal son of Sri Om Nath Prasad, resident of Diwan Mohalla, Dullighat, P.O. Patna City, District Patna 18. Akhilesh Kumar Das, son of Shri Satyanand Das, resident at Muzaffarpur, District Muzaffarpur 19. Sunil Kumar Singh, son of Shri Yougeshwar Singh, resident of Mohalla Hawanpura (North) P.O. Bhandari, District Nalanda 20. Ashok Kumar Yadav, son of Shri Jhauri yadav, resident of village Barah, P.O. Barah, P.S. Harnaut, District Nalanda 21. Binay Kumar, son of Shri Bihari Lal, resident of Kumarhtoli, Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna 22. Ajay Kumar Sinha, son of Sri Sant Kumar Sinha, resident of Chirayatar, East of T.P.S. College, Patna 23. Satyendra Prasad, son of Shri Kashi Nath Prasad, Asian Traders, Rajendra Nagar, patna 24. Dharmendra Kumar, son of Sri Ravindra Kumar Ravi, Idgah Road, Keshopur, P.O. Jamalpur, District Munger 25. Snajay Kumar Sinha, son of Sri Krishna Kumar Sinha, Power Road Road, Rajendra Nagar, Begusarai, District Begusarai 26. Surendra Mohan Das, son of Ugra Narayan Das, resident of Mohalla Station Road, behind J.K.High School, P.O. and District Begusarai 27. Anil Kumar, son of Shri Shyam Bihari Lal, resident of village Kalyanpur, P.O. Fatuha, District Patna … Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Secretary and Commissioner, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Youth, Art and Culture Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The Deputy Director General, N.C.C. Directorate, C.D.A. Building Rajendra Path, Patna-1 5. The Joint Director, N.C.C. Directorate, C.D.A. Building, Rajendra Path, Patna-1 6. Bihar Public Service Commission, through its Secretary, 15 Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Patna … Respondents ----------- 10. 19.7.2011 Having heard Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners, 3 Mr. Nadim Seraj, learned counsel for the Bihar Public Service Commission and Mr. Kundan Bahadur Singh, S.C.XXII, for the State, this Court is of the considered opinion that the relief sought by the petitioners to the following effect: “That, this writ application has been filed for commanding the respondents to immediately issue letter of appointment to the petitioners on the sanctioned and vacant post of Clerk in the office of Deputy Director General, N.C.C. Directorate, Bihar, Patna, on the basis of selection of the petitioners made after screening test, written and typing test, conducted by the respondents in connection with Advertisement No. VC-37-40/95, VCSP-O-10/95, VW-03/95 published in daily Hindi Newspaper “Hindustan” dated 23.6.1995 by the Regional Employment Exchange, Patna. This application has also been filed for holding that the petitioners have been legally and validly selected after due observance of the selection procedure viz screening, writing and typing test. This application has also been filed for holding that after final 4 selection of the petitioners on the basis of their performance in the interview by screening test, written test and typing test, in response to Advt.No. VC-37-40/95; VSCP-O-10/95 and VW-03/95, the respondents are not issuing letter of appointment to the petitioners illegally, arbitrarily and without there being any legal, valid and justifiable grounds for the same.” could be granted to them by this Court if their selection could have been made as per norms fixed by the State Government. It is not in doubt that the State Government by its Resolution No. 3/M/1097/90 Ka-6 dated 2.1.1993 in supersession to all its earlier executive instructions had laid down the specific norms for making appointment on Class III post by prescribing Bihar Public Service Commission to be the competent selecting body for making recommendation by way of direct recruitment on Class III post which was earlier being filled up on the basis of selection being conducted at divisional level. It is not in doubt that the Director of N.C.C. having got the post advertised on 23.6.1995 had neither been 5 left with the power of making selection on his own nor he could overreach the Government Resolution dated 2.1.1993. The Government Resolution dated 2.1.1993 was introduced with a view to achieve uniformity in the norms and selection process and its justification is proved from the manner of the selection of the petitioners and others, inasmuch as several round of written test, interview and typing test at different places were conducted, some in the headquarter of N.C.C. and other in the field offices of N.C.C. It was in fact in order to eliminate this disparity in the standard of making selection that the Government had come out with Resolution dated 2.1.1993 laying down the Bihar Public Service Commission to be the sole recruiting agency. In view of the fact that the Director of N.C.C. had clearly flouted the Government instruction dated 2.1.1993 and had evolved his own mechanism for making selection, the State Government was absolutely justified in rejecting such procedure of selection and consequently its decision for not appointing anyone including the petitioners from such 6 select list prepared by the Director, N.C.C. does not suffer from any error. The submission of Mr. Sinha that the Resolution dated 2.1.1993 did not come into force till 6.12.1995 has to be only noted for its being rejected. The Resolution dated 6.12.1995 was in respect of filling up Class III post from amongst Class IV employees by authorizing the Commission also to hold examination for such category of Class IV employees against 50% post of Class III post. That will not mean that the Resolution dated 2.1.1993 meant exclusively for direct recruitment on Class III post in the field offices were to be brought into force on a subsequent date and in fact came into effect only on 6.12.1995. The two resolutions dated 2.1.1993 and 6.12.1995 being on record and part of the counter affidavit would leave nothing for speculation that they traveled entirely in two different directions with the only meeting point that the Commission was the agency for making selection and recommendation in either form of appointment on Class III post whether by way of direct 7 recruitment or by way of promotion from Class IV employees to Class III post. In any event the petitioners cannot complain any discrimination, inasmuch as none from the aforesaid vitiated selection process have been appointed and the mere inclusion of name of the petitioners in the so called select panel would confer no right on them for being appointed. Considering all these aspects and also the fact that this Court after 16 years of alleged selection process would not be inclined to issue a direction for appointment of the petitioners on the basis of selection which was in teeth of the Government Resolution dated 2.1.1993. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/