MINA KUMARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PURSUANT to an advertisement published sometimes in 1989, process of selecting candidates to undertake A.N.M. Course began. The appellants in these two appeals responded to the said advertisement and participated in the selection process initiated for the District of Palamu. The candidates, as that of the appellants herein, after having had participated in the said result of their efforts in the selection process. A group of such candidates approached this Court by filing a writ petition seeking a mandamus upon the authorities concerned to publish the result. This writ petition was dealt with by a Division Bench of this Court. The said writ petition was contested by the respondents therein by filing a counter affidavit wherein it was contended that the selection process is vitiated by gross irregularities. In those circumstances, the Division Bench felt that it would be unwise to issue a mandamus to publish result of such selection and instead directed the Government to examine the matter.

(2.) THE appellants in LPA No. 282/ 1999 then approached this Court by filing CWJC No. 7713 of 1995. once again seeking a mandamus directing publication of the result of the said selection. To this writ petition, the Government filed a counter affidavit and therein in no uncertain terms elaborated the irregularities committed by the selectors at the time of selection. Having regard to such contention in the counter affidavit and those having not been dealt with in any rejoinder filed to such counter affidavit, a learned Single Judge of this Court by a judgment and order dated 12th July, 1996 specifically refused to issue a mandamus directing publication of the result, as was prayed for in the said writ petition, but at the sametime made it clear that it shall be open to the Director -in -Chief, Health Services, Bihar to take an appropriate decision in respect of selection and publication of the result of the petitioners, if any. Subsequent thereto, the Direc - tor -in -Chief, Health Services, Bihar took a decision to publish the result of the said selection, but later on by the impugned order decided to withdraw the said decision.

(3.) WHEN the writ petition was dealt with, a learned Single Judge of this Court held that it was not permissible to reopen the same issue which stood concluded by the decision rendered in the previous writ petition, i.e., CWJC No. 7713/1995.