DILEEP KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Md. Nadeem Seraj, learned GP-5, for the State.

(2.) The petitioners herein are on the panel of Executive Assistant prepared for the district of Sitamarhi on 14.10.2012 and are aggrieved by the fresh selection process initiated by the District Administration for preparation of new panel without exhausting the old panel.

(3.) Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioners, has relied upon the circular of the General Administration Department of the Govt. of Bihar dated 20.5.2011, a copy of which is placed at Annexure 3, to submit that the advisory at paragraph 4 very clearly stipulates that a fresh panel would be prepared only on exhaustion of the panel of the Executive Assistant already prepared by the department. He further in reference to the judgment of this Court (Dharmendra Kumar & ors. v. the State of Bihar & ors.,2017 4 PLJR 536) submits that it is taking note of this very stipulation present at paragraph 4 that the petitioner of the said case was directed for consideration of his claim. He next refers to the statement made in the supplementary affidavit filed in the proceeding on 29.11.2017 to submit that 20 candidates were appointed from the panel on 18.10.2013 vide Annexure 8, 17 candidates were appointed vide letter dated 20.11.2014 at Annexure 9 and 9 candidates were appointed on 7.3.2015 vide Annexure 10 but the case of the petitioners has been ignored although certain juniors from the panel were also appointed. According to Mr. Ranjan, the action of the respondents in making appointments from the panel at their choices should be backed with reasons which is missing in this case. While accepting the advisory issued by the Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, dated 5.5.2016 at Annexure 6, he submits that it would have a prospective effect to the panel prepared thereafter.