VISHWANATH SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the petitioners in these two cases have raised a common point in their challenge to the resolution of the State Government dated 10. -11 -1981 as per memo No. 1285 of the Health Department fixing the criteria for appointment of Ayurvedic and Unani Medical Officers, they have been heard together and this judgment will govern both the cases. A copy of the resolution has been annexed to the writ application in C.W.J.C. 578/82 as Annexure 8 and in C.W.J.C. No. 658/82 as Annexure 4. The attack is directed against the eighth condition which slightly differs in the annexures given in the two cases. The State counsel, after examination of the original file, stated that Annexure 8 in C.W.J.C. 578/82 is the correct copy, which fact is not controverted before us. The impugned resolution will, therefore, be read accordingly.

(2.) FOR the appointment of Medical Officers -Ayurvedic and Unani - an advertisement was made in 1980 and the petitioners applied. There was a fresh advertisement in 1981 which required ten years residence of the applicants in Bihar. The candidates who had applied were not to file fresh applications but had to submit certificates of residence which the petitioners did. They thus fulfilled all the conditions for appointment. But the petitioners in C.W.J.C. 658 were not issued interview letters and they had to come to this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 266/82 and in C.W.J.C. No. 485/82 and were allowed to appear at the interview in February, 1982. No such difficulty arises in the case of the petitioner of C.W.J.C. 574/82 as he was duly interviewed; The petitioners state that they learnt later that the authorities were deciding the question of selection for appointment and the basis of the criteria mentioned in the impugned resolution No. 1285 referred to above Including the illegal condition number nine.

(3.) FOR judging the relative merits of the candidates the resolution allots marks for certain accomplishments; for example, a candidate gets 4 marks for a Post Graduate degree and 2 marks for completing the training as a Houseman, etc. It is not necessary to give details of all the terms. The eighth condition permits 10 marks to be allotted to a candidate who has passed the matriculation examination or higher secondary examination or an equivalent examination held by the Bihar State Examination Committee or a University within the State. Although the petitioners are residents of the State of Bihar, they passed their matriculation examination/secondary examination from U. P. The petitioner in C.W.J.C. 578/82 states that as his maternal grandfather lived at Benaras, he passed the examination equivalent to matriculation examination from Benaras Hindu University in 1968 and was placed in the second class. However, he came back to Bihar for completing his studies and obtained his G. A.M. S. degree from Government Ayurvedic College, Patna. The petitioners aver that the allotment of 10 marks as said above is wholly illegal and puts them to serious disadvantage and so the same must be struck down. The petitioner in C.W.J.C. 578/82 has also challenged as illegal condition No. 4 of the impugned resolution which directs marks to be allotted to the candidates according to their result at the examination held for the purpose of admission in Ayurvedic college -3 marks for obtaining first division, 2 marks for second division and 1 for third division. It is said that the said examination having been held in non -technical subjects must be ignored as irrelevant. It is argued that a similar condition is never applied to Allopathic Doctors and it should, therefore, be held to prescribe an irrelevant and irrational criterion.