AJIT KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the Bihar Staff Selection Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission'). None for the State Government in the Department of Statistics and Evaluation. An advertisement was published on 23.8.2006 for 224 posts of Block Statistical Supervisor, Junior Statistical Assistants and Investigator. The two petitioners were applicants under the backward caste category, which numbered 27 in all. The advertisement stipulated that they were required to submit their caste certificate inclusive of Creamy Layer from the District Magistrate. The petitioners acknowledge having submitted their caste certificate from the concerned SDO. The advertisement itself stipulated that those who did not furnish their caste certificate from the competent authority shall be treated as unreserved candidate. They have therefore been placed in the general list and are aggrieved by their non-selection.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Commission issued communications to others for rectification of this deficiency. No opportunity was provided to the petitioners subjecting them to hostile discrimination. The petitioners have obtained backward caste certificate from the District Magistrate and claimed to have submitted it to the Commission and desired reconsideration of their candidature on that basis.

(3.) Counsel for the Commission submits that not only was a Under Postal Certificate communication sent to the individual Candidates including the two petitioners but paper publications were also made requiring the concerned candidates to rectify the defects as the present within the time indicated. The petitioners took no steps to do so within the time prescribed.