NIRMAL KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were appointed on Class-III and Class-IV post respectively in 1991. The appointment has been cancelled in 1993 by the Director on the ground that the proper procedure for such appointment, by way of advertisement, was not followed. A weak attempt has been made in para-6 of the writ petition by alleging that there was an advertisement on the notice board. However, the pleading fall short of the details about the number of persons who had applied for the job and who were called for interview pursuant to the alleged advertisement on the notice board.

(2.) The counter affidavit in paragraph No.9 denies the aforesaid averment of paragraph No.6 of the writ petition and says that the story of advertisement on the notice board has been concocted by the petitioners and the official records do not show any such advertisement. The counter affidavit also says that the advertisement is required to be issued in news paper and not on the notice board. In matters of public employment, this also appears to be the requirement of Article-16 of the Constitution of India which mandates equality of opportunity being given to all persons. Opportunity is given by issuing public advertisement. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners before cancelling their appointment. However, it has not been indicated, other than what has been stated above in this order, that if opportunity had been given, whether the petitioners had anything substantial to say in response to that opportunity.

(3.) The principles of natural justice are not mere technicalities for reversing of orders. Prejudice must also be shown.