IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1492 of 2009 Ram Kumar . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Dinu Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shiv Kumar Prabhakar, Adv. For the Respondents:- Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Adv. --------------- 2. 04.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner states that he was an applicant for the post of Constable under Advertisement No. 1 of 2004. At Paragraph-7 of the writ application he specifically asserts that he belongs to the general category and had submitted his application as a general category candidate. On 2.6.2008 he was informed by the office of the Superintendent of Police, Chairman, Constable Selection Board, Magadh Range Board No. 3, that he had been found successful and was required to appear on 12.6.2008 along with his original documents as specified therein. He did so. But appointment has not been provided unjustifiably. A counter affidavit has been filed affirmed by the Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad. Counsel for the State from Annexure-B, a letter dated 2.3.2009 addressed to the Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad submits that the petitioner had secured 13 marks. He was placed in the select list in the category of E.B.C. He 2 was asked to produce his caste certificate. He was unable to do so and acknowledged that he belongs to an upward caste. Appointment was therefore not possible. From the pleadings in the writ petition and the counter affidavit, it appears that the petitioner had secured 13 marks in the selection process. What remains unresolved is the category in which he had applied. Whether he had applied as a general category candidate or he had misrepresented himself as belonging to the extremely backward caste. Perhaps, if the respondents had been a little more careful in filing the counter affidavit and the deponent had spent some time in reading the writ petition, he would have realized the need to specifically answer Paragraph-7 of the same. Attributable to a casual counter affidavit, unmindful of the seriousness of the proceedings before this Court, the controversy shall continue and the credit for which shall go to the Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad. It is now considered proper to remand this matter at a senior level to the office of the Director General of Police who shall examine:- (a) whether the petitioner had applied as a general category candidate or an E.B.C. candidate (b) if he had applied as an E.B.C. candidate his claim has no merit and the Director General of Police 3 shall pass appropriate orders when the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. In that event the D.G.P. shall retain the liberty to take any or further steps as desired in accordance with law. (c ) if the petitioner has filed his application as a general category candidate. (d) any person with less than 13 marks has been appointed from the general category, the petitioner has a right to be considered for appointment as questions for violation of Article 14 shall then arise for consideration. (e) this shall be without prejudice to the rights of the Director General of Police to examine the original records to his satisfaction with regard to the actual marks obtained by the petitioner in the general category and then consider matters in accordance with law. Let this order be complied with in its entirety within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this order before the Director General of Police. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)