PUNAM KUMARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner was one of the candidates who was selected by Bihar Public Service Commission for being appointed on the post of District Fishery Officer- cum-Chief Executive Officer/Assistant Fishery Director. According to petitioner her name was recommended by BPSC and her name figured at serial no. 8 but she was not appointed due to intervening circumstances. The primary reason which kept her out from appointment is bifurcation of the State of Bihar and creation of separate State of Jharkhand. In terms of Reorganization Act, 2000 and decision taken thereto, one third vacancies arising in the undivided Bihar had to be surrendered to the State of Jharkhand. It is evident from the record that when the advertisement was issued the total number of vacancies indicated included the undivided Bihar.

(3.) Since one third vacancies were taken away, the total number of candidates who could be appointed in the general category came down to five. With this development obviously the petitioner could not be appointed despite her name figuring in the original select list forwarded by the BPSC.