IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1186 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2603 of 2009 ======================================================= Rajesh Mistri, S/O Sri Upendra Mistri, R/o Village -Panchagachiya Bazar, P.S.-Gopalpur, District-Bhagalpur. .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Commandant, Bihar Military Police No.-9, Jamalpur, Munger. 3. Chairman-Cum-Police Superintendent, Selection Scrutiny Committee "Military Police" Board No.-2, Motihari, Bihar. 4. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Purnea. 5. Sri Rakesh Kumar, S/o Harihar Mahto, R/o Village -Dharahara, P.S.- Gopalpur, District-Bhagalpur. .... .... Respondent/s ======================================================= Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sri Prakash Shrivastava Mr. Diwakar Prasad Karn, Advocates. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ram Subhas Singh, AAG 15 ======================================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 15-09-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 8th July 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 2603 of 2009, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. Pursuant to the public notice issued by the Bihar Military Police Board –cum- Superintendent of Police, East Champaran, Motihari, the appellant had applied for appointment as Sepoy in Bihar Military Police. He was selected and placed on wait list. On 2nd August 2008 the appellant was informed to remain Patna High Court LPA No.1186 of 2011 (2) dt.15-09-2011 2 / 3 2 present for verification of documents. Pursuant to such verification, the appellant was appointed as Sepoy in Bihar Military Police. Pursuant to a complaint made by one Rakesh Kumar, an enquiry was made in respect of the caste of the appellant. It was found that the appellant belongs to Other Backward Class whereas his candidature was considered in Extremely Backward Class and accordingly, he was appointed. So far as the Other Backward Class was concerned, aforesaid Rakesh Kumar had secured higher marks than the appellant. Pursuant to the said enquiry made by the Commandant, Bihar Military Police-9, Jamalpur, by his order dated 27th January 2009, the appointment of the appellant was cancelled and his service came to be terminated. Feeling aggrieved the appellant filed above CWJC No. 2603 of 2009 under Article 226 of the Constitution. The learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition. Therefore, the present Appeal. Learned advocate Mr. Sri Prakash Shrivastava has appeared for the appellant. He has strenuously urged that the impugned order of termination of service was made in contravention of the principles of natural justice. No disciplinary proceeding had preceded the said order of termination of service. The appellant does belong to the Other Backward Class. The caste certificate produced by the appellant also refers the appellant as Backward Class candidate. We do appreciate that the appellant’s appointment in Bihar Military Police was not vitiated by fraud or misrepresentation. The question of disciplinary proceeding, therefore, did not arise. The matter is very simple. Though the Patna High Court LPA No.1186 of 2011 (2) dt.15-09-2011 3 / 3 3 appellant was a Backward Class candidate, his candidature was erroneously considered in Extremely Backward Class category. In the category of Other Backward Class, aforesaid Rakesh Kumar had secured higher marks than the appellant. Had the appellant’s candidature been considered as Other Backward Class candidate he would not have been offered employment as there were other candidates having higher marks than the appellant. The impugned order made by the Commandant, Bihar Military Police suggests that the adequate opportunity of representation and of hearing was granted to the appellant. The learned single Judge has also found that the impugned order of cancellation of appointment and consequent termination of service was made in consonance with the principles of natural justice. Learned Advocate Mr. Shrivastava has not been able to dislodge the aforesaid finding. We see no merit in this Appeal. No case for interference is made out. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. Sujit/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)