IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9227 of 2005 RAGHUNANDAN MANDAL SON OF LATE KAMAL NATH MANDAL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NIRMALI HATWALIA, P.O. NIRMALI, DISTRICT SUPAUL. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE FOR APPOINTMENT, SUPAUL. ----------- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Anil Kumar Mukund For the State :- Mr. H. S. Roy, A.C. to A. A.G.II ------ 3 27/08/2010 Even according to the petitioner, the panel was notified on 21.08.2000 as would be evident from annexure-4 to the writ application. Name of the petitioner never figured in that panel. If that be so, his grievance that he has a right to claim benefit of appointment on the basis of the Disability Act will have to be decided in the light of the statement which has been made in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents it is categorically submitted that interview letter was issued to the petitioner to appear in the interview on 11.5.2000 but he chose not to appear before the Interview Board for the reasons best known to him. That was the background due to which his name did not - 2 - appear in the panel of those candidates who appeared and succeeded or failed. The stand of the State seems to be correct that the writ has been filed as an after thought because it is not open to the petitioner even to plead that he has no knowledge of the panel dated 21.08.2000 as the same was brought on record by the petitioner and there is no explanation for filing the writ application after almost five years of the said notification of the panel. The writ application of the petitioner is based on marked facts and assertions. No case for interference is made out. This writ application is dismissed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)