NARENDRA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UPON joint request, the matter has been taken up for final hearing, as the learned counsel for the Government has appeared at the admission stage.

(2.) BY this Court on, 29.9.1999 in CWJC No. 5351 of 1998, a direction was issued in the following terms: "If any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the authority will consider the same in accordance with law taking into consideration the benefit, if any, granted in favour of other persons, as stated above. A decision in this respect be taken and communicated to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation."

(3.) PURSUANT to the direction, a representation came to be made and it has been decided by the order of the authorities dated 12.1.2000, a copy whereof is produced as Annexure 8, which is considered, and, admittedly, it does not contain "why". The reason is not assigned. It is simply stated that the height of the petitioner is not in terms of the rule provision whereas, the question, which was directed to be considered on representation, has been to consider the representation for relaxation of age in accordance with law. Obviously, such a direction was given to consider the case of the petitioner on representation and to decide in accordance with law with reason which, precisely, was not done. Therefore, following directions, again, are required to be given: The respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner whether the rule for fixity of height should be relaxed or not. The respondent authorities are directed to consider afresh and decide in accordance with law and reason within a period of two months from today with an intimation to the petitioner.