IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.554 of 2005 1. MOTI PRASAD GUPTA, son of later Ramanand Prasad, resident of Singar Hat, Post – Sohsarai, P.S. Sohsarai, District – Nalanda. 2. Binod Kumar son of late Singeshwar Prasad, resident of village – Churi Chak (Nai Sarai), Post and Police station – Biharsharif, District – Nalanda. 3. Bijendra Prasad, son of Sri Pyare Paswan, resident of village and Post – Barara, Police station – Noorsarai, District – Nalanda. 4. Indradeo Prasad, son of late Janki Ram, resident of village – Bajitpur, Post, Police station and District – Nalanda. 5. Pintu Kumar, son of Sri Nand Kishore Prasad, resident of village – Bari Pahari (Mansur Nagar), Post and Police Station – Sohsarai, District – Nalanda. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif. 5. The Nazarat Deputy Collector, Nalanda at Biharsharif. ----------- 04. 16.8.2010 Even according to the stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit, they have an obligation to prepare a panel against the existence of vacancies in the district for appointment on Class-IV posts. The government circular which has been referred to in this regard is dated 26.5.1987 and letter No. 3577 dated 25.4.1997. Grievance of the petitioners is that right from the year 2004 till date no steps have been taken for preparation of a panel. The advertisement issued in the year 2003 came to be abandoned in the year 2008, may be taking cue from the observation of the High Court in CWJC No. 12417 of 2006 but the facts stand that the District Magistrate does have an obligation to prepare a panel every year in terms of the circular of the government including the Chief Secretary. Even if the stand of the State is taken into consideration so 2 far as the obligation of preparing of panel is concerned, it cannot be denied. The writ application is disposed of with a direction that the District Magistrate will take steps for preparation of the panel for the year in question in terms of the two circulars which have been relied upon by the respondents in the counter affidavit. No specific direction in favour of the petitioners as such can be issued. Their case will be considered on its own merit when the panel is prepared. The writ application is disposed of with the above direction. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)