1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.81 of 2011. Against judgment & order dt.26.11.2010 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 15582 of 2010. Anupama Kumari daughter of Shri Bhagwati Prasad, Resident of Mohalla Raja Bazar Behiyan, P.O. & P.S. Behiyan District Bhojpur. … Appellant. Versus 1.The State Of Bihar. 2.Secretary, B.P.S.C,Bailey Road, Patna. 3.The Secretary, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.Rita Singh daughter of Not known to the petitioner. Village & P.O.Tarapur, Dist.Munger. 5.Seema Kumari d/o not known to the petitioner. Village & P.S. Jamhaur Dist.Aurangabad. 6.sanjula Kumari d/o Not known to the petitioner. Village & P.O.Maura Jharkaha, P.S.Shankarpur Dist.Madhepura. 7.Miss. Lovely d/o Not known to the petitioner. Village & P.O. Kanap, P.S.Daudnagar, Dist. Aurangabad. 8.Punam Kumari d/o not known to the petitioner. Village Barhi Vigrah,P.O.Tarwan P.S. Wajirganj Dist. Gaya. ….. Respondents. ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Onkar Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For the State Mr. Gautam Bose, Sr. Adv., A.A.G.VIII. For the Commission : Mr. Lalit Kishore, Sr. Advocate. 7. 28.07.2011 The writ petition preferred by the appellant bearing C.W.J.C.No. 15582 of 2010 was dismissed by the order under appeal dated 26th November 2010. The appellant was an applicant in the Backward caste category under Advertisement No.4 of 2007 of the Commission for holding of 48th to 52nd Competitive Examination for various civil posts under different Departments. Her grievance before the writ court was that she ought to have been selected and appointed because in the backward category at least five persons with lesser marks were selected. The writ court noted the main controversy relating to submission of required caste certificate incorporating status as to creamy-layer also before the Commission by the time of interview as was stipulated in the advertisement. The various certificates filed by the 2 appellant did not meet the requirements because the certificate of the District Magistrate did not mention whether the appellant belonged to creamy-layer or not. The appellant was interviewed on 16th March 2010. For want of required certificate, she also submitted an affidavit in support of her claim, but admittedly the required certificate dated 15th May 2010 issued by the District Magistrate was filed on 17th May 2010. The result on the basis of interview and other requirement of selection was published on 12th April 2010. The writ court has taken note of a Division Bench judgment in the case of Bandana Govindam Vs. The State of Bihar (LPA No. 650 of 2010) decided on 7th April 2010. That judgment placed reliance upon the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Braj Kishore Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar and others reported in 1998(3) PLJR 34. The law highlighted on the basis of the aforesaid judgment is that no application/document shall be entertained by the Commission if the same is filed after the last date specified in the advertisement or the extended date, if any, notified by the Commission. It was clarified by the Full Bench that such application/document required to be filed by a specified date shall not be entertained even if the same is filed before the finalization of the select list. Initially we were impressed by the submission advanced on behalf of the appellant that partially blame lay with the District Magistrate concerned in issuing a faulty certificate mentioning only the fact that the appellant belonged to backward category, but without specifying further whether she did belong to creamy layer or not. On subsequent application, the required certificate was issued but belatedly much after the interview and even beyond the date of final result which marked the conclusion of the selection process. In Para 26 of the Full Bench judgment, it was laid down in sub- 3 para(d) as under: “In appropriate cases where this court is satisfied that a case of extreme hardship or injustice has resulted on account of factors beyond the control of the concerned candidate, this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction may grant relief in deserving cases. But in doing so, the court must be satisfied that the candidate concerned has acted diligently, and is not guilty of delay or laches in taking necessary steps for procuring the requisite certificates etc. However, no relief shall be granted where the requisite certificate is produced for the first time after the process of selection is complete and the selecting authority has made its recommendation”. Treating this case to be a case of hardship we directed the State Government to disclose whether there was any vacancy available for the appellant on account of non-joining of any candidate selected on the basis of the concerned competitive examination. In reply, the State has furnished figures which show vacancy in other categories, including in general category, but no vacancy in backward category or backward (L) category. On behalf of the State it has been admitted that even if this particular case is accepted as a case of hardship governed by the proposition of law settled by the Full Bench in Para 26(d) in the case of Braj Kishore Prasad (supra), no relief should be given because the requisite certificate was produced for the first time after the process of selection was over. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the process of selection cannot be complete till the appointments are made and all the posts are filled up. In our view, however, the process of selection is complete when the panel or the select list is published by way of result. Thereafter the process is not of selection, but of appointment. 4 We do feel that there was some hardship faced by the appellant on account of the concerned District Magistrate not issuing proper certificate at the initial stage and the issuance of subsequent certificate after about 2 months of the interview. But because the judgment of the writ court does not suffer from any illegality, we are unable to grant any relief to the appellant. The appeal is dismissed. Jay/ (Shiva Kirti Singh,J) ( Shivaji Pandey, J)