MITHILESH PRASAD YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 3 Superintendent of Police, Katihar to implement the direction of the INspector-General of Police (Provision and Training), Bihar. Patna (Respondent No. 2) as contained in annexure-5, whereby the service of petitioner has been directed to be taken back from the date the order is issued by the said Superintendent of Police, Katihar.

(2.) IN short, the case of the petitioner is that he was selected for appointment to the post of Constable after physical test at Bhagalpur in the year 1988 whereafter he received a registered letter bearing No. 3304 dated 16-7-1988 from respondent No. 3 asking him to appear before him along with original certificates in regard to the education, caste, age and home-guards with the clear understanding that the appointment shall be made only after due verification of the same. A true copy of the said letter has been annexed as annexure '1'. The petitioner in response to the same appeared before respondent No. 3 along with original certificates and after due verification of the same and after having been found suitable and fit in the medical test, was appointed as constable on 1-8-1988. Thereafter, he was sent to police training in December, 1988. However, in course of training the petitioner along with one Sudhir Prasad Yadav were sent back to Katihar as they were found to be illiterate and consequently, respondent No. 3 terminated their services with effect from 15-7-1989, a true copy whereof has been annexed as annexure-3.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that a Bench of this Court in the case of Sakhichand Yadav v. The State of Bihar reported in 1991 (1) BLJR 257 : (1) 1991 PLJR 67, held that Rule 663 of the Bihar Police Manual prescribing educational qualification for appointment of Constable is only regulatory and that the Selection Board has discretion to relax the educational qualification in appropriate cases. LEARNED Counsel submitted that from reading of annexure 5 it would appear that it was under special circumstances, that the service of the petitioner was directed to be taken back. Thus, according to him, the qualification proscribed under Rule 663 under the Bihar Police Manual which provides that candidate must have passed Secondary, i. e. Matriculation examination for appointment of a Constable, shall be deemed to have been relaxed, On the other hand, Mr. Krishna Murari, learned G. P. 5 submitted that no order has been produced on behalf of the petitioner whereby the educational qualification has been relaxed in his favour for appointment on the post in question. However, Mr. Krishna Murari, learned G. P. 5 could not dispute the genuinesses of the document contained in annexure 5 in absence of any counter-affidavit in the present case.