Surjit Kumar vs State of Bihar - 2023 Supreme(Pat) 1054

Breaking News

Back Next

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Pat) 1054

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, RAJIV ROY
Surjit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants : M/s Mukesh Kumar (in 296, 345, 372); Satyabir Bharti (in 374, 376, 387, 413, 414, 608, 609, 621); Bishnu Kant Dubey (in 10905); Prachi Pallavi (in 663); Vishwajeet Kumar Mishra(in 84); Jagjit Roshan (in 399)
For the Respondents: M/s P. K. Shahi, AG (in 296, 345, 372, 374, 376, 387); P.N. Shahi, AAG-10 (in 10905); S. D. Yadav (Aag-9)(in 413, 608, 609, 621, 663, 84, 399)

Headnote: Read headnote

Y. V. Rangaiah vs. J. Sreenivasa. AIR 1983 SC 852—Overruled by State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Raj Kumar, (2023) 3 SCC 773.

K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.—The controversy in the writ petitions, from which the above appeals arise, revolve around who is qualified to apply under the notification issued by the Government for selection and appointment of Lab Technicians: whether it is only those having Diploma in Lab Technician course, that too obtained from an Institution recognized by the Government of Bihar; or the persons who obtained such qualifications from anywhere in the country, even those who obtained their Diplomas through distance education, could apply. The selection which was commenced by an advertisement dated 21.06.2015, took a difficult path, by reason of the litigation initiated by those persons continuing as contractual employees. As of now, there are appointments made by virtue of the interim orders passed in the appeals, which appointments are subject to the final decision. We are hence, compelled to take note of the interim orders

Click Here to Read the rest of this document