PRAMATH PATNAIK,J. - (1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioners have challenged the selection of 20 Lady Supervisors in Palamau Division in the Child Development Project and further prayer has been made for setting aside the entire selection process and consequent appointment of private respondents as Lady Supervisors in Palamau Division in Child Development Project and further prayer has been made for direction upon the respondent to hold enquiry into the selection process under challenge.
(2.) Heard Mr. Arpan Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Rahul Kamlesh, J.C to learned S.C. II, Mr. Nikhil Kumar Mehta for the private-respondent nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 14, Mr. Anurag Kashyap, learned counsel for respondent No. 11 and Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh, learned counsel for respondent No. 15.
(3.) A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by respondent nos. 2,3 and 4 wherein it has been submitted that the petitioners along with others appeared in the examination on 27.01.2008. in which, the selected candidates secured 170 marks and above and also fulfilled other conditions and educational qualifications whereas the petitioners were not found eligible for selection, hence, the Appointment Committee did not consider their names for selection for appointment. Referring to Annexure-E and Annexure-F to the counter affidavit, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that from bare perusal of merit list it is apparent that the candidates selected for appointment had secured more marks and were fulfilling all the eligibility criteria, hence, there is no cogent reason to challenge the selection process or selected candidates.;