PARINA THAPA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner applied for the post of Trainer Drummer in pursuance of a public advertisement No.2/08, which is annexed as Annexure1 to the memo of petition. Thereafter the petitioner cleared all the tests taken by the respondents and she secured higher marks than the other candidates and even thereafter the petitioner has not been appointed and, therefore the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the respondents, petitioner has secured 50 marks, whereas one more candidate, namely Raj Kumari, who has secured 46 marks, she has been appointed leaving aside the present petitioner.

(3.) Counsel for the respondents has submitted that they have filed detailed counter affidavit as well as supplementary counter affidavit. It is submitted by the counsel for the respondents that pursuant to a public advertisement, which is annexed as Annexure 1 to the memo of petition, there were four vacancy for the post of Trainer Drummer. Two posts are kept for general category candidates, one is reserved for Scheduled Tribes candidate and last post is reserved for Other Backward Classes candidate. As per AnnexureB to the supplementary counter affidavit, two Scheduled Tribes candidates have secured 61 and 51 marks respectively and, therefore, instead of putting them in reserved category candidates, they are entitled to be appointed under General Category Candidates and there is no illegality committed by the respondents. So far another candidate, namely Raj Kumari, is concerned, she belongs to Other Backward Classes candidate for which there is one seat reserved and she is the only candidate in the category of Other Backward Classes candidates who has secure 46 marks and she is the 3 rd candidate selected for the posts.