IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.221 of 2008 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus KAMAL CHANDRA SAH ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. Satish Nr. Singh, JC to GA 3 For the Respondent : Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Mishra,Advocate --------------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ---------- Dated, the 2nd July, 2008. Re: I.A. No. 1784 of 2008 Appeal suffers from delay of 202 days and for that an application (I.A. No. 1784 of 2008) has been made. Even if we condone the delay in filing the appeal, for the cause shown in the application, we find that appeal has no merit. Rather the appeal is wholly frivolous and misconceived. 2. In counter affidavit to the writ petition, it was admitted by the present appellants that the writ petitioner was appointed by the Superintendent of Police, Katihar vide Katihar District D.O. No. 1757/94 dated 01.11.1994 as per order of Government of Bihar (Home) Special Memo no. 1410 Patna dated 19.8.1994 and under the Order of the Director General and Inspector General of Police, Bihar Memo no. 4574 dated 25.10.2004 as a special case for showing - 2 - bravery. In this backdrop, the inference by the Single Judge that the petitioner was given an appointment on the orders of Government of Bihar as an exceptional case on the ground of bravery, cannot be said to erroneous. 3. The Government counsel submits that the appointment given to the respondent is de hors Rule 661B of Bihar Police Manual. 4. This aspect has been considered by the Single Judge thus: “It is true that the Government of Bihar, by making the Manual and by providing therein Rule 661 B has directed all its Officers including the Director General of Police to recruit constables in the manner as has been provided for in the said Rule. It is the Government of Bihar who has created the Rule and it is, therefore, open to the Government of Bihar to make a departure from that Rule in appropriate cases and the same was done in the instant case by the Government of Bihar for the purpose of rewarding the petitioner for his bravery. It was unjust on the part of the police department of the State to think that Government of Bihar cannot make a departure in appropriate cases. It is true that no Officer of the Government of Bihar is capable of acting contrary to the said Rule and, accordingly, no officer of the Government can give an appointment contrary to what has been prescribed in Rule 661 B of the Manual. However, the Government of Bihar itself could make an exception and the same was done in the instant case. It must be kept in mind that the Manual, as it stands, is a creation of the - 3 - Government of Bihar in its executive side and not of the Government of Bihar in its legislative side and, accordingly, executive Government of Bihar can always make an exception to Rule 661 B of the Manual in deserving cases, but such exception must be made consciously and the same must be apparent on the face of the records.” 5. We find no justifiable reason to take a view different from that of the Single Judge. It is apparent that the appointment was given to the respondent as an exception to Rule 661B of the Bihar Police Manual on the ground of his bravery as his case was found to be deserving one for an exception. 6. The consideration of the matter by the Single Judge does not suffer from any legal flaw. 7. L.P.A. is dismissed in limine. 8. This disposes of I.A. No. 1784 of 2008. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Anil/