RAMESH KUMAR MERATHIA, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Ram Balak Mahato, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondents.
(2.) ALL these cases involve similar question and accordingly they are being disposed of by this common order. In W.P.(S) Nos. 5386, 5387, 5388, 6849 and 6322 of 2004, Mr. Anjani Kumar Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that separate Court fees for all the petitioners may be exempted as they have challenged the common decision of the District Establishment Committee dated 31.8.2004. He relied on the case of 1998 (2) PLJR 765 (Smt. Krishna Pati Devi and Ors. V/s. The State of Bihar and Ors.). Learned Advocate General submitted that he has got no objection if the Court fees are exempted.In the circumstances, payment of separate sets of Court fees for all the petitioners is exempted.
(3.) NOW merits. Though the petitioners have raised several contentions in their pleadings, Mr. R.B. Mahto confined his attack to Annexure -9, on the ground that the letters dated 3.12.1980 and 25.4.1997 (Annexures -B and B/1) were in force when the petitioners applied against the advertisement published on 21.11.2001 (Annexure -1 for preparation of pane) I and therefore, the decision dated 31.8.2004 (Annexure -9) issued during this process to the extent, it provides for holding written examination is illegal, arbitrary and bad.;