- (1.) THE present petition has been preferred mainly for the reasons that the petitioners are not selected as Lady Supervisors by the respondents, mainly for the reasons that the respondents have not followed the prescribed Equivalent Citation:2009 -JX(Jhar) -0 -1154 procedure and secondly for the reason that the respondents have wrongly fixed the eligibility criteria, according to which only few Graduates will be eligible for applying to the post of Lady Supervisor and, as stated in the public advertisement priority ought to have been given to the petitioners, as they are belonging to the Giridih District and, therefore, the petitioner's case has been wrongly discarded by the respondents.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the respondent -State, who has submitted that there is no breach of any of the laws, rules or regulations by the respondents, in appointing the Lady Supervisors. The present petitioners were given all opportunities to compete with other candidates. Looking to the number of applications for the post of Lady Supervisors, initially a scrutiny test was taken, which is a written test, Thereafter, oral interview was also taken. Both the petitioners were given such opportunities. They have appeared at the written test and, thereafter, they were also selected for the oral interview. They were invited for the oral interview. They have appeared at the oral interview. Looking to the comparative merits, all the candidates have been given the marks and the present petitioners have not been selected and, therefore, this writ petition is not tenable, once they have appeared in the written test as well as the oral interview. Moreover, these petitioners are not the power of attorney holders of all other Graduates, who are not eligible, as per the advertisement, because the petitioners have already been given chance to appear at the written test as well as oral interview. But, now not having been selected, they have preferred the present writ petition. So far as priority to be given is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that there is no mathematical rule that those, who are belonging to Giridih District or native of the Giridih District must be appointed. Always in a public employment, reasonable opportunity ought to be given to all, as stated hereinabove. All opportunities have been given to the petitioners, but, they could not prove their merits in comparison with other similarly situated candidates and, therefore, they have not been selected by the Interviewing Committee and, therefore, this writ petition deserved to be dismissed.
(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case: (i) it appears that present petitioner no. 1 is Graudate in Sociology and petitioner no. 2 is Graduate in Home Science and, therefore, they have applied for the post of Lady Supervisor, as per the public advertisement of the year 2005. (ii) it also appears from the facts of the case that the petitioners alongwith other candidates were invited for the written test and pursuant to the same, the petitioners have appeared at the written test and they were also selected. Having cleared successfully at the written test, they were also called for and appeared at the oral interview before the Interviewing Committee. (iii) it appears from the facts of the present case that in the oral interview, these petitioners have not been selected. The subjective satisfaction of the Interviewing Committee cannot be challenged by the petitioners. All these depend upon the performance of a candidate before the Interviewing Committee. There is no mathematical rule that the petitioners ought to be selected, even though they are less meritorious in comparison with others. The main grievance ventilated by the petitioners is that there is no such prescribed procedure in the public advertisement and, therefore, the whole selection method is illegal. This contention of the potitioners is not accepted by this Court, mainly for the reason that the petitioners have already been given an opportunity for appearing at the written test as well as for oral interview and pursuant to the same, they have appeared in both the tests. Once they appear in the teat and not selected, they are estopped from challenging the procedure, adopted by the respondents. Whenever 10/5/2 for 014 less Pagenumber 73 of posts, higher number of applications are accepted or received by the State authorities, it is for the respondent authorities to adopt such method, so as to scrutinize the candidates. The method adopted by the respondent authorities is one of the few legal methods of selection. Written test as well as oral interview is not an illegal method. Both the petitioners were given all these opportunities adequately and, now they are raising a plea that the Graduates in other faculty, like engineering, science etc. are not given their eligibility for the post of Lady Supervisor. Thus, a lump sum general argument for other is not accepted by this Court, because these two petitioners are not the power of attorney holders of all those other candidates nor this is a Public Interest Litigation. This is basically a Private Interest Litigation. Equivalent Citation:2009 -JX(Jhar) -0 -1154 (iv) it also appears that there are two or three candidates, who are in the select list of a post of Lady Supervisor, out of a particular district, namely, Giridih. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the candidates of Giridih District ought to have been given priority and ought to have been appointed, as stated in the public advertisement. Learned counsel for the respondents has rightly submitted that there is no mathematical rule that all the candidates from Giridih only should be appointed as Lady Supervisor. The word "priority" cannot be interpreted to the effect that all such candidates from Giridih District only should be appointed, even though they are less meritorious. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent - State that since the candidates selected have to perform the duties with the State authorities, they must have some merits. If totally meritless person is selected, it will be detrimental to the public at large. Stand taken by respondent is accepted by this Court. It is not a mathematical rule that all the candidates of Giridih District ought to have been appointed as Lady Supervisor. Out of total, approximately 54 candidates, except two or three, all are from the District of Giridih, In view of these facts, there is no breach of the word "priority". By and large, this "priorty" has been followed and observed by the respondent -State. 5 As a cumulative effect to the aforesaid facts and reasons, there is no substance in this writ petition and, hence, the same is hereby dismissed. ;