IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4700 of 2007 1. Md. Jower Ahmad son of Md. Diljan Nadaf, resident of village Parsahi, P.S. Dadania, District- Madhubani 2. Dilip Kumar Gupta son of Ram Avtar Sah, resident of village Meghaul, P.S. POandaul, District Madhubani 3. Pawan Kumar Yadav son of Mishri Lal Yadav resident of village Ekdara, P.S. Khutauna, District Madhubani …. … Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 4. The Agriculture Production Commission, through the Commissioner, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 5. The Agriculture Director, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, SPatna 6. The Joint Director, Agriculture, Darbhanga Range, Darbhanga 7. The District Agriculture Officer, Madhubani 8. The District Magistrate, Madhubani 9. The District Development Commissioner, Madhubani 10. The Additional Collector (Land Ceiling), Madhubani 11. The District Recruitment Officer, District Employment Exchange, Madhubani 12. The Deputy Collector (Establishment) Collectorate, Madhubani …. … Respondents ---------------------------------- 03/ 15.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. 2. Petitioners are aggrieved by the non- inclusion of their names in the panel prepared for appointment on the post of Village Level Worker by 2 the Collector, Madhubani pursuant to Advertisement dated 27.12.1993, Annexure-1. 3. By filing counter affidavit, State- respondents have refuted the prayer made in the writ petition stating that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 have not been empanelled because their signature on the application form did not match with the signature put by them at the time of their interview and during verification they further confirmed that their application form was signed by their brother. Such fact has been stated in paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit, which has not been disputed by petitioner nos. 1,2 by filing rejoinder thereto although copy of the counter affidavit was served on their counsel way back on 19.12.2007. In the circumstances, I have to accept the case of the respondents that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 did not fill up the application form. So far petitioner no.3 is concerned, he has not been empanelled because his signature taken at the time of interview did not match with his signature on the application form. The signature of petitioner no.3 was verified by the handwriting expert at the instance of 3 the authorities. The report of the expert is dated 20.4.2006, Annexure-10, wherefrom it appears that the signature of petitioner no.3 taken at the time of interview did match with his signature on the application form. 4. In the light of the report of the handwriting expert dated 20.4.2006, Annexure-10, I direct that the Collector, Madhubani to empanel and appoint petitioner no.3 as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)