BIRENDRA LAL SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) This pertains to appointment of the petitioner on the post of Van Chalak.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that pursuant to advertisement No. 32 of 1997, the petitioners since were eligible, had applied for the post and the petitioners and other eligible persons were subject to certain tests and a selection list was prepared and certain names were recommended to the State Government for appointment on the post of Van Chalak and on the basis of the recommendation petitioner Nos. 1 to 9 and 11 now have been appointed on the respective posts. But so far petitioner Nos. 10 and 12 are concerned, they have not been appointed. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that initially all these petitioners and others were recommended by the Bihar Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as Commission), but owing to lesser number of vacancies and keeping in view the roster clearance etc. the matter was sent to the Commission for fresh recommendation and as per the fresh recommendation, petitioner Nos. 10 and 12 have come to know tht they have not been recommended.