UMESH CHANDRA SHIVA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise out of the common judgment and order dated 17.3.2009, whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the respondent Alok Kumar C.W.J.C. No. 16423/2008, has been allowed by setting aside his order of termination. It has to be noted that the prayer in another writ petition of this appellant, C.W.J.C. No. 1063 of 2009, seeking a direction for his own appointment after setting aside the appointment of the respondent Alok Kumar, who was the writ petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 16423/2008 has been rejected. Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Umesh Chandra Shiva while assailing the common order in both the writ petitions has contended that once it becomes an admitted fact that the respondent Alok Kumar was a candidate of general category and could not have been appointed on the post of Shiksha Mitra in view of there being only three vacancies for the post of Shiksha Mitra in the general category, the other conclusions arrived by the learned Single Judge as with regard to upholding the appointment of respondent Alok Kumar cannot be sustained.

(2.) Per contra Mr. Sudhir Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Alok Kumar has submitted that once this Court would go into the respective details of selection on the post of Shiksha Mitra, it would automatically discover that Alok Kumar was the third candidate of general category, inasmuch as, one Laxman Kumar Pankay was the candidate of most backward category who could not have been appointed against the post of general category. He would therefore, contend that the order of the learned Single Judge should not be interfered as it has done substantial justice between the parties.

(3.) In the considered opinion of this Court the answer to the propositions raised above gets clear from paragraph - 10 of the counter affidavit filed by the State, wherein it has been stated as follows: -