YUGAL KISHORE RAI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is only this much that though their names appear in the original selection list, which was published on 9.7.2000 but, subsequently, a revised select list was published on 17.10.2001 in which the names of petitioner nos. 1 to 3 namely, Yugal Kishore Rai, Suresh Chandra Manjhi and Nand Lai Thakur were not included. It appears that an order as contained in Annexure -10 dated 2.7.2002 was issued whereby the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 have been informed that since thoy were not included in the revised select list dated 17.10.2001 and, therefore, they have not been appointed. It further appears that the name of petitioner no. 4 Sanatan Rawani though was included in the revised selecl list dated 17.10.2001 but he has also not been appointed since his name appeared much below in the select list.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 wherein it is stated that as per the District Level Selection Committee a Scheme was drawn up and, accordingly, a panel was prepared. The names of the deserving candidates were duly recommended but subsequently, it was found that the said list was suffering from certain defects in respect of merits of the candidates including the fact that only three of them were given the marks of overage while others were deprived of this privilege: and, as such, the said panel was cancelled and no appointment was made on the basis of the aforesaid defective panel. A final panel of 132 candidates was published on 17.10.2001 after removing the defects in the earlier panel by the Establishment Selection Committee on merit basis in which the petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 3 did not find any position. However, petitioner no. 4 occupied SI. No. 70 but since there was vacancy of only 66 posts and, therefore, the candidates till SI No. 66, were given appointment and the petitioner no. 4 who was at SI. No. 70 could not be appointed. Nothing has been stated in the counter affidavit that prior to removal of the name of the petitioners from the revised select panel any notice to show cause or a chance of hearing was given to them.