- (1.) ON 16th February, 2010, this Court passed the following order: "1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has argued out the case, in detail, and has submitted that though the petitioners are eligible and fully qualified and have cleared all the examinations like written, physical and oral interview, they have not been given appointment on the posts of Constable. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are working as Home Guards and it is alleged that 50% seats are reserved for Home Guard Category, but, the respondents are not replying in this writ petition, though copy of the writ petition has already been served on 22nd April, 2008 to the respondents.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents is seeking time to file reply. Time, as prayed for, is granted. The matter is adjourned on 29th March, 2010.
(3.) IF the affidavit is not filed on or before the next date of hearing, I hereby, direct respondent no. 2 (The Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi) or a responsible officer deputed by respondent no. 2, who is well conversant with the matter, to remain personally present before this Court on the next date of hearing at 10.30 a.m. IF the affidavit is filed, there is no need of any officer to remain personally present before this Court." Thereafter on 29th February, 2012, the following order was passed: " Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that looking to Annexure 2/A of the counter affidavit, filed by the State, it appears that because of column no.5 of Annexure A/2, the petitioners (except petitioner nos. 8, 9 and 11, who have been referred in the decision, rendered by a Division Bench of this Court, as reported in 2006(4) JLJR 702, are covered by 932 candidates. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that because of several defects and several manipulations like manipulation in height, then in the certificate of educational qualification, date of birth etc., these candidates are not appointed on the posts of Constable whereas column no.5 says "other deficiencies". The question is what are these "other deficiencies", so far as the present petitioners are concerned (except petitioner nos. 8, 9 and 11). 3. Learned counsel for the State is unable to point out as to what are these "other deficiencies" and, therefore, I direct the respondents to file counter affidavit, so far as the present petitioners are concerned, except petitioner nos. 8, 9 and 11, about the deficiencies, found out for which they have been covered by the list of 932 candidates. The affidavit shall be filed on or before the next date of hearing. 4. I also direct the State Government to place on record whether any person has been dismissed from service, because of so called manipulation in the list of 932 candidates. The matter is adjourned to be listed on 26th March, 2012." Learned counsel for the respondents seeks time so that he may obtain necessary instructions in the matter.;