BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Patna High Court dated 26th September, 1994 passed in CWJC No. 379 of 1993.

(3.) The short facts of the case are that the Bihar State Subordinate Services Selection Board was constituted by the Government of Bihar on 20th April, 1981 for selecting candidates and recommending their names to various posts in Class III in various departments of the Government. On 13th May, 1987 the said Selection Board issued an advertisement inviting applications from eligible candidates in the prescribed proforma and the last date for receipt of the applications was 8th June, 1987. The Board conducted a written examination on 27/28th February, 1988 and the result of the written examination was announced on 7th April, 1991. Candidates were required to appear for Physical test on 21st April, 1991. A list of 199 successful candidates was placed on the Notice Board of the Board on 17th May, 1991. Out of the said list names of 26 persons were recommended for being appointed as Assistant Jailor to the Inspector General, Prisons on 17th July, 1991. The Government of Bihar issued a resolution on 22nd October, 1991 deciding to abolish the Subordinate Services Selection Board and the job of the Subordinate Services Selection Board was entrusted to Bihar Public Service Commission. It was, however, indicated in the said resolution that the examination which has already been conducted by the Board, the result thereof will be published by 27th February, 1992 and thereafter, all personnels and assets of the Board shall be deemed to have been transferred to the Bihar Public Service Commission. On 6th December, 1991 on the recommendation of the Service Selection Board 11 person were appointed as Assistant Jailor and again on 20th December, 1991, 4 persons were appointed to the said post of Assistant Jailor. The Service Selection Board published a revised list of successful candidates containing 238 candidates on 28th February, 1992. The Government of Bihar in the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department found that while recommending the names for appointment, the Service Selection Board is not adhering to the roster point and, therefore, under the order of the Government the Inspector General of Prisons wrote a letter to the Service Selection Board on 29th February, 1991 requesting the Board to recommend 8 Scheduled Castes and 8 Scheduled Tribes candidates for being appointed as Assistant Jailors. The Board recommended 15 candidates by its letter dated 4th March, 1992 but the said recommendation did not contain the names of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes persons. The respondents name was included in the said list submitted on 4th March, 1992. The Inspector General of Prisons by his letter dated 8th May, 1992 did not act upon the said list and again requested the Board to send Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates. As the respondent could not be appointed, he filed a writ petition in the High court alleging therein that persons securing less marks and occupying position below him have been appointed elsewhere and yet he has not been appointed and, therefore, sought for issuance of a writ of mandamus. By the impugned order the High Court having directed the Public Service Commission and the State to consider the case of the respondent for appointment against a vacant post of Assistant Jailor or any other equivalent post, the present appeal has been preferred.