RAMDEO RAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application has been filed by the petitioner for a mandamus on the respondent state not to make appointments on the basis of the second and subsequent recommendation of the Bihar Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the 'Commission') by which the Commission has recommended the name of Respondent 5 for appointment to the Senior Branch of the Finance Service and the name of the petitioner for appointment to the Junior Branch of the Finance Service, although, according to the petitioner, the Commission had earlier recommended the name of the petitioner for Senior Finance Service and that of respondent 5 for the post of Battalion Commander.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the 21st competitive examination was held for the different services in the State of Bihar in May-June, 1972, the result thereof was published on the 3rd March, 1973. The 9th May, 1973 was fixed by the Commission for viva-voce examination. The petitioner and respondent 5, along with others, had indicated their order of preference for the different services in their original applications. Some posts of Battalion Commander, which were not to be filled up at the time when the applications had been received, became available. It is the admitted case that, on the 9th May, 1973, persons who had given option for the post of Deputy Superintendent in the Police Service, were asked to indicate their preference between the post of Deputy Superintendent in the Police Service vis-a-vis the Battalion Commander. The petitioner as well as respondent 5 indicated their preference on that very day, that is, on the 9th May, 1973. On the 13th June, 1973, the final result was published. The 23th Jan., 1974 was fixed as the date for Medical Examination of' the candidates. On that date, the petitioner as well as respondent 5 were medically examined. According to the petitioner after examination, the Medical Board recommended for his hydrocoele operation. After undergoing the said operation, the petitioner again appeared for medical examination on the 15th March, 1974, when he was found to be fit. In the meantime, the respondent Commission sent its recommendation under a letter, dated the 23rd Feb. 1974 to the State Government. Amongst the candidates belonging to the scheduled castes, the Commission recommended the name of respondent 5 for the post of Battalion Commander and the name of the petitioner for Senior Finance Service, saying in the remarks column that the Medical report of the petitioner had not been received till then:-

(3.) On the 22nd March, 1974, the petitioner requested the Appointment Department to send his medical report to the Commercial Taxes Department. On the basis of the aforesaid recommendation, dated the 23rd Feb., 1974, the Home Department of the State Government and the Cabinet approved the appointment of respondent 5 to the post of Battalion Commander, and, on the 9th July, 1974, a notification was issued appointing respondent 5 to the post of Battalion Commander (A copy of the said notification is Annexure "D" to the counter-affidavit of respondent 5) According to the petitioner, the other candidates, whose names had been recommended by the Commission, were also appointed. The petitioner could not be appointed along with the other candidates, because he had to produce a medical certificate indicating operation of his hydrocoele and was to be medically examined again. As already stated, he was examined on the 15th March, 1974. It has been stated in the writ application that the petitioner and 12 other scheduled castes candidates, including respondents received memo No 2096, dated dated the 14th May, 1974, from the Commission asking to indicate their choice between the post in the Police Service and the post of Battalion Commander, without making any change in the serial of preference of choice of service as indicated in their application forms. The petitioner sent a letter to the Commission saying that the candidates had indicated their choice at the time of their viva voce examination and that should be treated as final, and, as his name had been recommended for Senior Finance Service by the Commission, there should not be any change in the services for which the candidates had been selected by the Commission. A copy of the said letter is Annexure '3' to the writ petition. Respondent 5, according to the petitioner, indicated his preference afresh and he indicated his preference for Senior Finance Service over the Battalion Commander Instead of indicating his preference between the post in the Police Service and the post of Battalion Commander respondent 5 indicated his order of preference for all the services afresh, putting Battalion Commander against serial No. 6 and Bihar Finance Service (Senior Branch) against serial No. 2.