CHANIYA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Dhananjaya Nath Tiwari, the learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) The petitioner is a person hailing from B.C. community from the same Panchayat where the P.D.S. license was to be given. However, for the vacancy meant for E.B.C. category, the private Respondent No. 5 has been selected even though she does not hail from the same Panchayat.

(3.) Mr. Tiwari submits that according to Rule 8 of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, a person hailing from the same Panchayat is to be given priority. He further submits that in the present case, the advertisement itself prescribed that in the event of no candidate turning-up for the category of the vacancy, person of the other category could be adjusted. Without resorting to this mechanism as prescribed in the advertisement, a candidate (Respondent No. 5) of E.B.C. category was selected even though she hailed from a different Panchayat.