DEEPAK KUMAR SAH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Counsel appearing for the State.

(2.) Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that pursuant to notice inviting applications from the eligible candidates for being registered as Homeguards in the district of Deoghar, the petitioners among others did apply. Applications of the petitioners being found in order, they were asked to undergo physical test which they underwent and came out successful. Accordingly, names of the petitioners were impanneled in the list issued under the joint signature of three persons, namely, District Commandant (Homeguard), Superintendent of Police (Headquarters) and the Sub-divisional Officer, Deoghar on 27.2.2009. Thereafter the same list was published in the newspaper whereby successful candidates were called upon to report at the Headquarters. Accordingly, the petitioners reported at the Headquarters but petitioners were not enrolled in the role of the Homeguards, rather a notice was published in the newspaper whereby it was informed that the list published earlier is being kept in abeyance. Under this situation, the petitioners have come to this Court directing the respondents to take decision in the matter of registration of the petitioners as Homeguard for the District of Deoghar.

(3.) Having heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it is evidently clear that till date the list of the successful candidates have not been cancelled, rather it has been kept in abeyance only for the purpose of making verification of the documents to be produced by the successful candidates but for that, the authorities have consumed almost a year and still they have not finalized the process.