R.R.PRASAD, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State.
(2.) IT is the case of the petitioners that pursuant to the notice inviting applications for being registered as Homeguard in the district of Deoghar, petitioners did apply. After undergoing physical tests, all the petitioners came out successful and their names were impaneled in the list issued under the joint signature of the District Commandant (Homeguard), Deputy Superintendent of Police and the Sub -divisional Officer, Deoghar. That list was published in the newspaper whereby successful candidates were called upon to report to the Headquarters. Accordingly, they did report to the Headquarters but they were not registered as Homeguard. Subsequently, a notice was published in the newspaper that the list published earlier has been kept in abeyance. When nothing was done for a quite long time, the petitioners filed this writ application. In that writ application, a counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the District Commandant (Homeguard) wherein it was stated that the list has been kept in abeyance for making verification of the documents submitted by the successful candidates. In that situation, the case was disposed of directing the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar to get the process of verification completed within a period of four months. When that order was not complied with, a contempt application was filed. At the same time, a Review application, vide Civil Review No.4 of 2011 was also filed on behalf of the respondents seeking review of the order by which the authority had been directed to complete the process within a period of four months on the ground that the selection committee when submitted provisional list for its approval, the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar did receive several complaints of irregularities being committed in the process of selection whereupon he constituted a committee of two members to enquire into the allegation and on enquiry being made, it was reported that several irregularities have been committed and, therefore, the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar vide its order dated 9.10.2009 cancelled the list and passed an order to start a fresh process for selection but the District Commandant (Homeguard ) in his counter affidavit did not point it out to the Court that the list had already been cancelled and under the wrong assumption of the fact that the list has been kept in abeyance, order was passed. Taking into account the aforesaid fact the order dated 16.7.2010 was recalled and the writ application was directed to be placed for admission.
(3.) MR .R.P.Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that even if it is assumed that certain irregularities have been committed whereby certain persons have illegally been included in the list, the entire selection process does not get vitiated when there has been absolutely no allegation that the petitioners by adopting illegal means got the places in the selection list, and therefore, the petitioners may not be allowed to suffer on account of wrong being done by other persons and under that situation, the authority be directed to proceed with the appointment of those persons who have not been alleged to have committed irregularities.;