RAM NARAYAN PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State.

(2.) The Petitioner was an applicant for a contractual appointment on the post of Accountant for the period of 11 months under an Advertisement dated 17.9.2007 in the District of Rohtas under the ATMA Scheme. He stood at Serial No. 2 of the merit list. The person at Serial No. 1 did not join. The Respondents dispatched a communication for joining belatedly with an incorrect address. It never reached the Petitioner. The person at Serial No. 3 came to be appointed. The Petitioner then filed this writ application. The contract of candidate at Serial No. 3 was not renewed after 3.12.2008. the Respondents then published a fresh advertisement on 29.5.2009.

(3.) Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner had disclosed his postal address as Village and P.O. Gorakhparasi in the District of Rohtas (Sasaram). The Respondents sent the communication to him at Karakat, Sasaram. The Pin Code was wrongly mentioned as 82115 in place of 802214. Additionally the proof of dispatch by speed post placed by the Respondents demonstrates that it was dispatched on 18.11.2007 and not 8.11.2007 as contended by them. Joining had to be submitted by 19.11.2007. The person at Serial No. 3 of the merit panel having been wrongly appointed, there is no justification for not considering the claim for appointment of the Petitioner.