RAGHWENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant case has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID 19 Pandemic, requiring social distancing.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 30/7/2009 issued by the Under Secretary, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited i.e. the respondent no. 6, whereby and whereunder the claim of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Assistant Personnel Officer, has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner is younger in age than the candidate last shortlisted though the said candidate as also the petitioner have secured the same marks. The petitioner has further prayed to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Assistant Personnel Officer against the vacant post published vide employment notice no. 10 of 2018, by the respondents.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Accounts Clerk and he is at present working as Account Assistant in the Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited since 10/5/2013. An advertisement bearing employment notice no. 10/2018 (internal) was published, inviting online applications for appointment on various posts including that of Assistant Personnel Officer, from the eligible employees who have been working in the regular establishment for minimum five years in the Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited and its four subsidiaries companies. The petitioner had applied for being appointed on the post of Assistant Personnel Officer. It is the case of the petitioner that he was surprised to find that his name has not figured in the list of shortlisted candidates for the said post of Assistant Personnel Officer, despite having secured the cut off marks in the unreserved category. In fact the petitioner is stated to have secured same marks as that of the last selected candidate, namely Rajeev Kumar. It is also submitted that the minimum service length of an employee to qualify for appointment on the aforesaid post of Assistant Personnel Officer was reduced from five years to three years vide corrigendum dtd. 30/1/2018 in order to favour the private respondent no. 7 herein. The aforesaid employment notice no. 10/2018 (internal) envisaged 13 vacant posts of Assistant Personnel Officer and as far as the petitioner's category is concerned, i.e. the unreserved category, five vacant posts had been advertised. Under clause-11 of the employment notice no. 10 of 2018, it has been stipulated that the candidates would be shortlisted on the basis of marks obtained in paper based written exam (OMR based) and the minimum qualifying marks for the test shall be 40 % for the unreserved category. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted, by referring to clause-7 of the Karmik Seva Samvarg Nimayawali, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the ..Rules, 2015..) that the post of Assistant Personnel Officer is the entry level post of the personnel cadre and 5 % of the total sanctioned post of Assistant Personnel Officer is to be filled by way of internal appointment from the merit list prepared on the basis of limited written competitive examination, in which those employees or staff who have completed 5 years of service with the company/ Board shall be eligible to appear. Thus, it is submitted that since the respondent no. 7 namely Ms. Chinmayee had not completed five years of service as on the date of filing of the application, she was not eligible to be considered for appointment on the post of Assistant Personnel Officer, nonetheless, her name figures at serial no. 6 in the list of shortlisted candidates for the post of Assistant Personnel Officer, although it is yet another aspect of the matter that the respondent company, by a corrigendum dtd. 30/10/2018, has amended the terms and conditions of the employment notice no. 10 of 2018, by relaxing the required minimum service length from five years to three years, though in the original advertisement bearing employment notice no. 10 of 2018, the required minimum service length was prescribed as five years, for the purposes of filing online application. It is also submitted that no merit list has been published, as is postulated under Rule 7 of the Rules, 2015, hence the entire process of recruitment and the consequent appointment on the post of Assistant Personnel Officer stands vitiated in the eyes of law. It is further submitted that only three shortlisted candidates have joined on the post of Assistant Personnel Officer, hence vacancy still exists, thus the petitioner can be accommodated.