Blog

Reservation provision are enabling provisions and different state governments can have different methods of reservation.There is no challenge to the Rules and what is challenged us in the matter of application alone : High court of Patna 

Title- kamlesh kumar singh vs the union of India & others

Decided on-9/11/2023

+CWJC No.23624/2019

CORAM- HON’BLE JUSTICE MR.P.B BAJANTHRI & HON’BLE JUSTICE MR.RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

INTRODUCTION

As the petitioner and Respondent 7 and others were participated in the process of selection and appointment to the post of GDS MD/MC , Majhari Kishun Branch office account with Jagdishpur whereas the petitioner name was reflected in the competative chart at serial No.50 against column of remarks it has been indicated No SLC and Mark-sheet attached.The petitioner has assailed the order of appointment in favour of Respondent No.7 dated 30/06/2015 before the central administrative Tribunal,Patna Bench,Patna in O.A.No.050/00241/2016.The Tribunal rejected the petitioners petition.Hence, the present petition is been filed.

FACTS

As per the facts the petitioner and Respondent 7 and others were participated in the process of selection and appointment to the post of GDS MD/MC were one Sri Dhananjay Kumar was selected and appointed on 1/05/2015. He had reported for duty on 05/05/2015 within a week he has resigned to the post.On 11/05/2015 resulted in filling up of the aforementioned post while appointing respondent No.7.OBC vacancies were required to be filled up with reference to second point.The second point was alloted to Sri Dhananjay Kumar and next third vacancy was allotted to Sri Prem Chandra yadav but the petitioner name reflected in the competative chart at serial No.50 as remark has been indicated No SLC and Mark-sheet attached. Where the petitioner assailed the order appointment bin favour of Respondent 7 before the central tribunal Patna for which the tribunal rejected the petition. Hence the present petition is been filed. Whereas the learned councel for the petitioner submitted that respondents were not required to operate comparative merit list while appointing next merited candidate.In order to ascertain what is the criteria for filling up of vacant post on resignation of the selected and appointed candidates.Where the learned councel for the respondent filed a counter affidavit and directed to produce the copy of letter dated 12/03/2013 and 26/06/2013 and Directorate letter and relist the matter in 18/09/2023. Thereafter matter was adjourned from time to time and respondent have failed to produce.

The COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

 As per the Hon’ble court as the matter was adjourned from time to time even this day the respondent have failed to produce.Later on Directorate letter No. even dated 25/06/2010 was placed on record. The relevant documents are of the year 2013,having regard to the fact that process of recruitment has commenced in the year 2014. Thereafter as on 2014 instruction for the filling up of vacancies were required to be taken note of.The petitioner has not questioned the validity of select list.Further it is evident from the assessment comparative chart of OBC for the purpose of appointment to the post of GDS/MD/MC Majhari Kishun B.O account with Jagdishpur.As stated in the chart that No SLC and Marksheet attached which means that petitioner was not eligible to be considered for the appointment. Consequently he has no locus so there cannot be PIL on behalf of petitioner that too in service matter and before the central administrative Tribunal.so there is no interim order before the central administrative tribunal or before this court.Accordingly the present writ petition stands dismissed.Further in the present case despite asking the postal authorities have failed to produce the cited letters. Therefore the principle laid down by the apex court cannot be straight away apply In which apex court held that reservation provision are enabling provisions and different state governments can have different methods of reservation.There is no challenge to the Rules and what is challenged us in the matter of application alone.

PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.

Written by -Prachee Novo Mukherjee

Click here to view the full judgement