(1.) Heard Mr. Umesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel alongwith Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Prasad, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent.
(2.) In this intra-court appeal, the assail is to the order dated 29.7.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 7018 of 2009 whereby the learned Single Judge has held thus: "Here, in my view, is a question of survival of the petitioner as against hassles for a corporate giant like L.I.C. These two conflicting interest have to be balanced. The answer can only be in one direction, specially, keeping in view the scarcity of employment in these days. Petitioner, it is not disputed, had duly qualified on merit, a position for OBC still remains unfilled. The only thing that was that the petitioner could not be turned up for the medical test and is now told that as the training programme is also over nothing can be done. In my view, these special facts call for a special treatment. It is not that the appointment process has to be reopened or upset. The in-house theoretical training is only of two weeks apart from practical job exposure of about two months compared to the loss which this petitioner never would suffer. The inconvenience (practical hassles) to the corporate giant like L.I.C. would be minimal. Thus, balancing the two as a Court of equity as well, this Court directs L.I.C. to accept the joining of the petitioner, on petitioner being medically qualified and would be treated as a regularly selected Apprentice Development Officer, though his seniority would reckoned from the date of his present joining."
(3.) Be it noted, in course of hearing on 18.2.2010 when debate went on, Mr.Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-writ petitioner fairly stated that he really could defend the order passed by the learned Single Judge and we must say the statement made by him was absolutely correct. However, at that juncture, we had requested Mr. Umesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel whether the respondent-writ petitioner could be appointed in the post in question.