IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18974 of 2008 AMAR NATH PRASAD . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2/ 27/08/2010 I.A.1448/09 has been filed for adding 29 persons as intervener petitioners. Learned counsel for the interveners specifically acknowledges that they all seek individual relief, but they have not paid individual court-fees. This Court considers the same as sufficient justification not to allow the intervention applications. If so advised, they may file separate writ applications when the court-fees paid by them presently may be appropriately adjusted and the balance court-fee shall be required to be paid. Additionally, originally a single petitioner came to this Court on 17.12.2008. A counter affidavit has been filed by the State in respect of that one petitioner in detail. Had the interveners joined in the writ application originally itself, the State would not have been harassed time and again by requiring fresh counter affidavits at intermittent stages of the litigation. The petitioner in the present application is stated to have been a candidate from the Patna Sadar Block in the B.C. Category. The counter affidavit states that according to the roster there was only one vacancy - 2 - in that category. Out of total 15 marks the sole candidate appointed in that capacity had secured 14 marks while the petitioner had secured 11 marks. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that irrespective of that fact there remain several other vacancies where the petitioner can be adjusted and appointed. This Court does not opine that to be a proper ground to adjust him when the petitioner was an applicant for a particular area, has been considered in accordance therewith and not found eligible. This Court is not persuaded to widen the scope of his application beyond what it originally was as that will be violative of Article-14 of the Constitution of India vis-à-vis other candidates. The application is dismissed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)