Patna High Court
Santosh Kumar Suman vs The State Of Bihar on 9 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7384 of 2020
======================================================
Santosh Kumar Suman Son of Shri Ram Prasad Gupta, Resident of Ward No.
13, Near Masjid, Main Road, Singheshwar Asthan, Madhepura, P.S.-
Singheshwar Asthan, District-Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of General
Administration, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The State Health Society, Bihar, Family Welfare Building, Sheikhpura,
Patna, through its Secretary, Health-Cum-Executive Director.
5. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Health Society, Madhepura.
6. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Member Secretary, District Health Society,
Madhepura.
7. The Superintendent, Sadar Hospital, Madhepura.
8. The Secretary, Bihar Technical Service Commission, 19 Harding Road,
Patna.
9. The Chairman, Bihar Technical Service Commission, 19 Harding Road,
Patna.
10. The Deputy Secretary, Bihar Technical Service Commission, 19 Harding
Road, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, SC-12
Mr. Kamlesh Kishore, AC to SC-12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 09-02-2021
The present writ petition has been filed to direct the
respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for selection
on the post of Physiotherapist, as advertised by the respondent
no. 10 in the month of March, 2020, after giving age relaxation
Patna High Court CWJC No.7384 of 2020 dt.09-02-2021
to the petitioner.
In this connection, the learned counsel for the
petitioners has referred to an order dated 16.10.2020 passed by a
coordinate Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 7220 of 2020
(Krishna Murari vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), relevant
portion whereof is reproduced herein below:-
"In All India Groundnut Syndicate Vs.
Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in AIR 1954
Bom. 232, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Chagla, Chief Justice
has laid down the principle that one cannot take
advantage of his own default,which reads as follows:-
"But the most surprising contention is put
forward by the Department that because their
own officer failed to discharge his statutory
duty, the assessee is deprived of his right
which the law has given to him under Sub-
section (2) of Section 24. In other words, the
Department wants to benefit from and wants
to take advantage of its own default. It is an
elementary principle of law that no person we
take it that the Income-tax Department is
included in that definition can put forward his
own default in defence to a right asserted by
the other party. A person cannot say that the
party claiming the right is deprived of that
right because "I have committed a default and
the right is lost because of that default."
Similar view was expressed by the Apex Court in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.7384 of 2020 dt.09-02-2021
case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Jagannath
Achyut Karandikar reported in AIR 1989 SC 1133
where the Apex Court held out that one cannot suffer
on account of lapse of the respondents in holding the
examination regularly.
In view of the admitted fact that the petitioners are
working on contractual basis as Physiotherapist/
Occupational Therapist from the date when they
were below the age of 37years, the State is obliged
to consider their cases for regular appointment by
granting one time age relaxation.
Accordingly, the writ application is allowed. The
respondents are directed to consider the case of the
petitioners for regular appointment granting one
time age relaxation having regard to the fact that
they were appointed on contractual basis as
Physiotherapist/ Occupational Therapist from the
date when they were below the age of 37 years and
they are still continuing on the post.
Necessary corrective measures must be adopted by
the respondents at the earliest so that the petitioners
may not be adversely affected in the selection
process."
The learned counsel for the parties are in agreement
that the present petition stands squarely covered by the aforesaid
judgment rendered in the case of Krishna Murari & Anr.
(supra), hence I deem it fit and proper to dispose off the present
writ petition in terms of the order dated 16.10.2020 passed by a
Patna High Court CWJC No.7384 of 2020 dt.09-02-2021
coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Krishna Murari
(supra), however, with a caveat that the case of the petitioners
shall be considered for regular appointment by granting one
time age relaxation, only in case the selection process pertaining
to the advertisement issued in the month of March, 2020 is not
yet over.
The writ petition stands disposed off on the aforesaid
terms.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
S.Sb/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 19.02.2021
Transmission Date
