Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) Both the writ petitions have been filed questioning legality of order dated 30.12.2008, whereby claim of the petitioner(s) for appointment on Class-IV posts on the ground that persons junior to them have been appointed, has been rejected.
(2.) Heard.
(3.) Pursuant to advertisement no. V 02/2002 issued on 4th April, 2002 inviting application from candidates enrolled in the District Employment Exchange for appointment on Class-IV vacant posts in various Muffasil Offices in Hazaribagh district, the petitioners submitted their applications in prescribed format. They assert that they possess requisite qualification for appointment on Class-IV posts. Petitioner in W.P.(S) No.1947 of 2013 belongs to scheduled caste category. Similarly, petitioner No.1 in W.P.(S) No. 2084 of 2013 belongs to scheduled caste category whereas, petitioner No.2 belongs to O.B.C. category. In the panel of 450 candidates prepared by the respondent, name of the petitioners were included. On 25.10.2005, 346 candidates were recommended for appointment on existing vacancies and appointment letters to 308 candidates were issued. The petitioners and 20 other candidates approached this Court by filing W.P.(S) No.4238 of 2006 raising a grievance to the appointments made in breach of roaster, which provided 18% seats for scheduled caste candidates, 24% for O.B.C. candidates and 8% for scheduled tribe candidates. The writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 23.08.2008 with a direction to the respondents to consider petitioners' representation for their appointment on existing vacancy on Class-IV posts in Hazaribagh district. Order dated 16.10.2008 whereby their representation has been rejected, is under challenge in the present proceeding.;