BIRENDRA KUMAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was claimant to the post of Krishi Salahkar in terms of the advertisement no.2 of 2010-11. According to him, he is Intermediate in Agriculture Science and belongs to the general category having aggregate marks of 67.33%. When the panel was drawn, petitioner's name did figure at serial no.78. Later a waiting list was also published where name of the petitioner was shown at serial no.3 but persons having lesser marks were placed at serial no.1 and 2 and they have been appointed. When, the petitioner was not appointed, he raised his grievance before the authorities. Thereafter he has approached the High Court for a direction.

(2.) So far as the private respondents are concerned, they are appointees under physically handicapped category. So far as the petitioner is concerned, stand is taken that he did not participate in the counselling, the fact not being denied by the petitioner. However, he submits that since he did not receive the communication that was the reason why he could not participate, which is the reason for his non-appointment.

(3.) This issue, therefore, must rest with regard to a direction for appointment of the petitioner in the above circumstances. He, however, submits that there are almost 25 seats, which are still vacant. Petitioner has filed a representation. He should be given an opportunity now to occupy one of the seats, which are vacant, in view of his marks and merit position.