Patna High Court
Dr. Nishanta Bharati vs The State Of Bihar on 17 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.638 of 2021
======================================================
DR. Nishanta Bharati aged about 34 years (Gender - Male) S/o Sri Rajendra
Prasad Resident of Village-Brahmachari, P.S.-Kahalgaon, District-Bhagalpur
At Present Posted As Junior Resident, Government Medical College, Bettiah,
District-West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Genral Administration Department, Govt. of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Bihar Technical Service Commission thorugh its Secretary, Govt. of
Bihar, Patna.
4. The Dy. Secretary, BIhar Technical Service Commision, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhu Prasun
: Ms. Renu Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. D. Yadav, AAG 9
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 17-01-2022
The matter is heard via video conferencing due to
circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is hereby directed
to furnish copy of the writ petition to the learned counsel for the
State-Commission.
Patna High Court CWJC No.638 of 2021 dt.17-01-2022
3. In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the
following relief/reliefs:
"(i) FOR issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs,
Order/Orders, Direction/Directions commanding the
Respondents to select the Petitioner for appointment on the
post of General Medical Officer against advertisement
being Advertisement No. 16/2019 issued by the Bihar
Technical Service Commission on 08/08/2019 on the
requisition of the General Administration Department,
Govt. of Bihar vide its Letter No. - 10725 dated 05/08/2019,
whereby, the Petitioner was not selected for appointment
only for the reason that five marks was not added as per the
advertisement for his whole one year work experience in
central government hospital, which is illegal, arbitrary and
out rightly against the terms of the said advertisement.
(ii) FOR issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs,
Order/Orders, Direction/Directions commanding the
Respondents to appoint the Petitioner giving him service
and all consequential monetary benefits from the date he
was eligible for such appointment and maintaining his
seniority from the said date.
(iii) FOR any other relief/reliefs for which the
Petitioner is entitled under law."
4. In the absence of establishing legal/statutory right
followed by demand before the competent authority, petitioner is
not entitled to writ of Mandamus in the light of Apex Court
decision in the case of Mani Subrat Jain V. State of Haryana
reported in (1977) 1 SCC 486.
5. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed off as not
maintainable.
6. The present order would not come in the way of
submitting a detailed representation to the competent authority
Patna High Court CWJC No.638 of 2021 dt.17-01-2022
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this
order. The competent authority is hereby directed to examine the
grievance of the petitioner at the earliest.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
GAURAV S./-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 24.01.2022
Transmission Date
