ROHIT KESHAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) There is an intervention application I. A. No. 2433 of 2016 for addition of the applicant as a party as it is contended that any decision passed in the present writ petition would affect the case of the intervenor-applicant also. Applicant is an In-service candidate and concerned that if resolution dated 11.04.2016, part of which is impugned herein, is going to be quashed or read down, In-service candidates, who are entitled weightage in the preparation of merit list of Postgraduate Diploma Course would suffer.

(3.) On account of the order being proposed to be passed hereinafter upon considering the stand of the respondent-State conveyed through learned counsel for the State Mr. Rajesh Kumar, GP-V, the apprehension of the applicant-intervenor appears to be misplaced and there appears to be no necessity of his impleadment in the present writ petition. For better appreciation of the controversy raised, it is apposite to reproduce the order dated 22.04.2016 hereunder:-