Back
2024 Supreme(Pat) 556
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Dr. ANSHUMAN, J.
CWJC Nos.159, 17260, 18137 of 2018 with 14693, 14876 of 2017; 21212, 22747, 22807 of 2019
(13.8.2024)
Smt. Krishnavati Devi and Ors. (in 159)
Raghwendra Kumar Rai and Ors. (in 14693)
Ranjani Kumari and Ors. (in 14876)
Munna Kumar Yadav (in 17260)
Manish Yadav and Ors. (in 18137)
Vinay Kumar Mishra (in 21212)
Nagendra Yadav (in 22747)
Pappu Yadav (in 22807)
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents (in all)
M/s Mahendra Thakur(in 159, 14693, 18137); Krishna Thakur (in 159); Rajeev Kumar Singh (in 14693, 14876); Gyanandra Kumar Diwakar, Prabhjot Singh, Abhijeet Singh (in 14876); Ranjan Kumar Srivastava, Shashwat Srivastav (in 17260); Umesh Kumar Singh (in 21212, 22747, 22807).
M/s Ajay Kumar, AC to GP-4(in 159); M/s P.K. Verma-AAG-3 (in 14693, 22807); Suman Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-3 (in 14693); Md. Nadeem Seraj-GP-5 (in 14876, 17260); Shalini Mishra, AC to GP-5 (in 14876); Manish Kumar-GP-4 (in 18137, 22747); Ajay Kumar, AC to GP-4 (in 18137); Md. N.H. Khan (SC-1), Md. Isha, AC to SC-1 (in 21212); Ajay Kumar, AC to GP-4 (in 22747); Mankeshwar Tiwari, AC to AAG-3 (in 22807).
Headnote:
Bihar Home Guard Act, 1947 with Rule 1993 – Recruitment to the post of Home Guard – the term of advertisement has not been followed by respondent in the process of preparation of the select list and instead of district-wise vacancy, they have adopted block-wise vacancy – there is departure and particularly in the light of the legal analysis by the Hon'ble DB of the Court, the vacancy ought to be made completely in accordance with the Bihar Home Guard Act, 1947 read with Rule 1953 only – respondent directed to consider the case of the petitioners and accommodate them in the vacancy against the district of Gopalganj – if the petitioners are found otherwise eligible for selection, then necessary and corrective measures may be taken by the respondents within 90 days – writ petitions allowed. (Paras 7, 8 & 9)
State of Bihar Vs. Manjay Kumar, L.P.A. No. 645 of 2021 – Relied.
Dr. Anshuman, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioners and select them as a Home Guard panel in the District of Gopalganj in terms of advertisement No. 02/2011.
3. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the claim of all the petitioners are common that they are claiming about their entitlement to be appointed on the post of Home guard pursuant to the above mentioned advertisements with minimum qualification prescribed for the said post. The issue involved in all cases are common i.e. the appointment as Home Guard, by the respondent authorities have been made Block-Wise whereas, those appointments have to be made District-Wise, as per law.
4. Counsel for all the writ petitioners jointly submits that the recruitment to the post of Home Guard according to the Bihar Home Guard Act, 1947 read with Rule 1953 was to be made through District-Wise or Block-Wise has already been tested by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 645 of 2021 titled as State of Bihar & Ors. vs. Manjay Kumar & Ors. with analogous cases arising out of C.W.J.C. No. 11645 of 2019 and the Hon’ble Division Bench has pleased to held in Paragraphs 3 to 7 as under:—
3. The State Government evolved policy decision in so far as identification of home guard post namely Urban and Rural. For Urban, 1090 vacancies and for Rural 10032. Among these vacancies, it was allotted to respective 38 revenue districts plus two police district overall forty districts. Except Patna, East Champaran, Purnea and Khagaria these four districts are concerned. Home Guard post are filled up by the concerned district magistrate with reference to district wise and not block wise as narrated in advertisement. The petitioners are all from the Muzaffarpur district, Supaul, Vaishali, Samastipur and Bhagalpur. In so far as Vaishali district is concerned, there were two advertisement namely in the year 2009, there are 40 petitioners and 107 vacancies are available and advertisement 02 of 2011 notified on 16.07.2011 is concerned, there are 75 petitioners and 76 vacancies are available. Similarly, in Muzaffarpur 28 petitioners read with 74 vacancies; Supaul 62 petitioners 99 vacancies; Samastipur 18 petitioners 138 vacancies and 31 petitioners in Bhagalpur and 67 vacancies are available. Faced with these material information question for consideration is whether petitioners could be accommodated against vacancy earmarked for other than the block in which petitioners have made application or not. In other words, each of the petitioners who have applied in the particular block, they are lesser merited. Further, the post is governed by the Bihar Home Gurads Act, 1947 read with Rules 1953.
4. Rule 5 deals with the Procedure for appointment of officers and men of the Home Guards Force. Sub-rule 4 read as under:—
“(4) (i) Applications for enrolment as a Home Guard shall be made in Form A (in Hindi) to the District Magistrate of the district in which the applicant ordinarily resides or to the Commandant.
(ii) Home Guards shall be enrolled by the District Magistrate on the recommendation of—
(a) A District Committee in each district consisting of the Commandant or, in his absence, Battalion Commander, the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police of the district, and a non- official member nominated by the State Government. The District Magistrate shall be the Chairman of the Committee; or
(b) A State Committee consisting of the Commandant and such other members as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. The Chairman of this committee shall be nominated by the State Government.
(iii) After holding tests of the general knowledge, alertness, intelligence and physical fitness of the candidates (who make applications to the District Magistrate) under its supervision, the district committee shall int
