The Patna High Court dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal against an order of a single Bench that rejected a writ petition concerning non-selection to posts of Lady Supervisors. The Court held that no illegality or procedural defect was shown in the selection process.
The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.521 of 2015 Arising out of
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9115 of 2013
Patna High Court LPA No.521 of 2015 dt.21-06-2016
2/4
District- Nawadah.
.... .... Respondent/s
=========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shri Prakash Srivastava, Advocate. Ms. Anu Priyadarshi, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar, AC to SC 2
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 21-06-2016
Re.: Interlocutory Application No. 2331 of 2015
The application is for condonation of delay of 59 days in filing of the appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, we find that sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. Consequently, the delay of 59 days in filing of the appeal is condoned.
Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.
Re.: Letters Patent Appeal No. 521 of 2015
The challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is to an order dated 20.11.2014 passed by the learned single Bench in CWJC No. 9115 of 2013, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants against the selection to the post of Lady Supervisors remained unsuccessful.
The appellants, as Anganbari Sevikas, applied for the post of Lady Supervisor against 25% post reserved for Anganbari Sevikas. In the
Patna High Court LPA No.521 of 2015 dt.21-06-2016
3/4
final selection list, the appellants were not among the selected candidates. In the writ petition directed against their non-selection, the Court directed the appellants to approach the Divisional Commissioner for redressal of their grievances. It is in terms of the said direction, the Divisional Commissioner passed an order on 31.12.2012 rejecting the claim of the appellants. The challenge in the writ petition to the order of the Divisional Commissioner remained unsuccessful. Still aggrieved, the appellants are in Letters Patent Appeal.
A perusal of the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner shows that bonus marks were given for the higher qualification i.e. Intermediate, Graduation and Post-Graduation. Marks were also given for continuous service as Anganbari Sevika.
Learned counsel for the appellants could not point out any procedural illegality or irregularity in awarding marks to the candidates on the basis of criteria fixed. The learned single Bench rightly found that while exercising the power of judicial review, this Court examines the decision making process and reappraisal of the evidence or re-appreciation of the issues of fact cannot be permitted unless stark perversity is established.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, we do not find any illegality in the decision making process by the respondents culminating with the order of the Divisional Commissioner dated 31.12.2012. The reasoning given by the Divisional Commissioner is fair and reasonable. Merely because the appellants were not selected is not a ground for disputing the selection process undertaken by the respondents. It
Patna High Court LPA No.521 of 2015 dt.21-06-2016
4/4
could not be pointed out that how and in what manner the selection process suffers from any illegality.
We do not find any merit in the present Letters Patent Appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.
(Hemant Gupta, J)
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
Sujit/P.Kumar
U
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the single Bench erred in holding that there was no procedural illegality or irregularity in the selection process for the posts of Lady Supervisors for Anganbari Sevikas.
Whether the Divisional Commissioner's order rejecting the claim of the appellants for non-selection was arbitrary or perverse.
Whether sufficient cause exists for condonation of delay in filing the Letters Patent Appeal.
Renu Kumari and others
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare
Hemant Gupta
Ahsanuddin Amanullah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
