- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been denied appointment by the respondents on Class IV Post in the district of Hazaribagh in respect of which a panel was prepared pursuant to an advertisement bearing no. V02/02 dated 24th April, 2002 issued by Assistant Director(Employment), Hazaribagh, respondent no. 4. The petitioner participated in the written test and physical test before the Selection Committee and a panel was prepared on 21st October, 2005, which is enclosed as Annexure A to the first counter affidavit. The petitioner being a person from Scheduled Caste Category was placed at Serial no. 370 in the said panel.
(2.) IT is the contention of the petitioner that in the list prepared for the scheduled caste candidate his place was at serial no. 42, which is contained at Annexure -3 series. It is the petitioner's case that a person from the same scheduled caste list at serial no. 45 being Ranji Kumar has been given appointment. It is also stated that the same person's name is at serial no. 385 in the panel whose name is at serial no. 45 in the list of scheduled caste candidates. The respondents were asked to specifically answer why the candidature of this petitioner was ignored while that of the said Ranjit Kumar was considered and he was granted appointment. The respondents filed supplementary counter affidavit on 23rd August, 2012. They have taken a stand that after preparation of the said panel office order was issued which is contained at Annexure -C, asking recommended candidates to appear before the District Level Panel Construction Committee with their relevant certificates showing their eligibility. It is submitted that some other candidates had approached this Court in W.P. (S) No. 4238 of 2006 and W.P.(S) No. 2819 of 2006. It is further submitted that panel was prepared for appointment of Class IV employees in the year 2005, and it has already elapsed after the period of one year as per the decision of District Level Panel Construction Committee dated 16th October, 2008, therefore, the question for making appointment from the panel does not arise and fresh advertisement has been issued bearing no. 1/2010 for preparation of new panel. It is further contended on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner did not participate pursuant to the office order contained in Annexure C for verification of the certificates before the District Level Panel Construction Committee and accordingly he was not appointed. It further appears that other candidates had approached this Court in W.P. (C) No. 4566 of 2008 for being considered for appointment on Class IV post from the same panel, this court disposed of the said writ petition vide order dated 15th October, 2008, directing the competent authority to consider and take a decision in respect of the said person within the stipulated period. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submits that because of the passing of the said order the said person who had approached this Court in W.P. ( S) 4566 of 2008 were considered and one of the petitioners of the said case has been appointed pursuant to the orders passed by this Court contained at Annexure F. However, the case of the petitioner was not recommended as he did not appear or file his representation and certificate in question pursuant to the notice contained at Annexure C dated 28th February, 2006.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that no notice was either published in the local Newspaper or personally served to the candidates including the petitioner to appear before the District Laval Panel Construction Committee and as such his case cannot be rejected on such frivolous ground when another person, namely, Ranjit Kumar is at serial no. 385, as already indicated above, has been granted appointment while the petitioner was at serial no. 370 in the said panel and from the said scheduled caste category.;