STATE OF JHARKHAND Vs. DR. AMARESHWAR PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has a chequered history, but only those facts which are relevant for deciding the present appeal required to be noticed, which are as under:

(2.) WHAT it appears that respondent No. 1 Dr. Amareshwar Prasad as well as one Dr. Muni Bagish Tiwary were posted as basic health workers. Dr. Amareshwar Prasad was appointed as Homoeopathic Medical Officer on being Selected by Selection Committee. His appointment as Homoeopathic Medical Officer was challenged by Dr. Muni Bagish Tiwary by filing a writ petition before the Patna High Court being CWJC No. 8253 of 1988. The said writ petition was disposed of by terms of order dated 8.1.1990, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure -2 to this memo of appeal. From the said judgment contained in Annexure -2, it appears that the writ petitioner Dr. Muni Bagish Tiwary had raised a question that the Selection Committee, which selected Dr. Amareshwar Prasad, had made its own criteria for deciding amongst the basic health workers as to who should be selected for appointment as Homoeopathic Doctor and they decided to hold interview and to award marks on the basis of performance in the interview. According to Dr. Tiwari, only because Dr. Amareshwar Prasad, was awarded 5 marks in the interview and, as such, he ranked higher than him i.e., Dr. Muni Bagish Tiwary, though the said writ -petitioner claimed that he was senior and was better on merit than Dr. Amareshwar Prasad. The Patna High Court on consideration of facts held that the petitioner's case i.e., Muni Bagish Tiwary's case deserved a fresh look by the Appointing Authority and Selection Committee and accordingly the matter was remitted back to the Director, Indigenous Medicine. Government of Bihar, Patna, respondent No. 2, for reconsideration in the light of the observation made in the said order in order to find out as to who was senior and superior in merit between the two i.e., writ petitioner and Dr. Amareshwar Prasad.

(3.) MR . A. Allam, learned Sr. SC -II, appearing for the appellant -State of Jharkhand submitted that pursuant to the order and direction of the Patna High Court in CWJC No. 8253 of 1988, the marks awarded to Dr. Amareshwar Prasad in the interview was cancelled and excluded while determining the inter se merit of the candidates who appeared in the selection process and thereafter a fresh merit list was prepared. In that merit list Dr. Amareshwar Prasad was placed at serial No. 13 whereas Dr. Muni Bagish Tiwari was placed at serial No. 4 and since there were three vacancies available, therefore, Dr. Amareshwar Prasad and Dr. Muni Bagish Tiwari were excluded from the selection list and they were not appointed to the post of Homoeopathic Doctors.