RAJ NATH PRASAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE heard the counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) HE submits that although the petitioner was suitable for the post of EDBPM at Naina, district - Nalanda, yet the entire selection process was cancelled on an erroneous assumption that none of the applicants fulfilled the eligibility. The counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the averments made in paragraph 8 of the writ petition. Except the bald statement that the petitioner was most suitable candidate for appointment to the post of EDBPM at Naina and that he fulfilled the no material whatsoever has been placed on record by the petitioner that could have shown that he fulfilled the eligibility. In the circumstances, the cancellation of entire selection process and non -selection of the petitioner to the post of EDBPM at Naina cannot be faulted. It is pertinent to notice that thereafter, the re -advertisement was issued and respondent no. 4 has been appointed as EDBPM at Naina. We, thus, find no merit in the petition. It is dismissed in limine.