IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6998 of 2003 Paras Nath Singh, Son of late Ramrup Singh, Resident of Village Bhoda (Tola Chapra) Panchayat Barhari, Police Station, Bagen Gola Block Bramphpur, District Buxar. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Department of Rural Development (Panchayat Raj), Govt. of Bihar, Bishwesheriya Bhawan, Patna. 3. The Director, Directorate of Panchayat Raj, Govt. of Bihar, Vikas Bhawan, Patna. 4. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna. 5. The District Magistrate, Buxar. 6. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Buxar. 7. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Buxar. --------- Respondents ----------- 6 11.01.2010 Heard Mr. J.K. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1. That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction(s) for quashing the order of the roster clearance issued by the respondent no.3 by the letter No. 1435 dated 13.7.1999 by which out of 22 vacancies of the post of Panchayat Sewak only 2 posts have been given to the general category, the same is contrary to the 50 per cent Rule and as also in view of the order passed by this Hon’ble Court in the similar matter in CWJC No. 4641/1995 dated 24.11.1995. This Hon’ble Court has been pleased to hold the reservation cannot be more than 50 per cent on a particular occasion inclusive of 2 carry forward vacancies to the reserve category and considered the name of petitioner for appointment on the post of Panchayat Sewak in general category as per the direction given by the Director, Panchayati Raj vide Memo No. 693 dated 5.2.2000 and directed to hold the meeting of the Selection Committee at least once in six months.” Mr. Rai had proceeded to make submission that the case, in hand, will be squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in CWJC No. 11618 of 1999 vide Annexure-18 to the rejoinder affidavit. Mr. Rai, in fact, also went to make his submission that once the petitioner was selected, he had a right for being promoted on the post of Panchayat Sevak. Counsel for the State, on the other hand, would submit that the whole issue has now been resolved by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment dated 11th August, 2009 in LPA No. 789 of 2006 (The State of Bihar & Ors. Vrs. Subhash Chandra & Ors.). In this context, he would refer paragraph nos. 15 & 16 of the judgment to contend that in view of the statutory provision made in the year 2003 and its effective implementation in the 3 year 2006 Act, the persons seeking elevation on the post of Panchayat Sevak from Dalpati could not claim it as a matter of right unless they came within the earlier Government decision. In this context, counsel for the State has referred to the creation of 531 posts, which was in compliance of the order of this Court and would submit that for Buxar district, not a single post of Panchayat Sevak was created and as such, on that basis, at least, the petitioner cannot claim the post of Panchayat Sevak. Mr. J.K. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute that his case is also to be covered by paragraph nos. 15 & 16 of the said judgment and the LPA. That being so, this writ application is disposed of in terms of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Subhash Chandra Shukla (supra). Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)