Recruitment must adhere to the advertised criteria, ensuring fairness in selection processes based on established vacancy criteria.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER

4 05-12-2025 The petitioners have invoked the Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:-

“i For issuance of an appropriate writ quashing the order contained in memo no 259 dated 15.3.2022 issued under the signature of respondent District Magistrate cum Chairman District Selection Committee Jamui by which in most arbitrary manner the claim of the petitioner for their Selection on the post of Home Guard has been turned down.

ii. For issuing an appropriate writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the decision taken by the respondent authorities for merging the vacant 24 seats of the District Home Guard, pursuant to the final result published in the Advertisement No.

01 of 2009 iii. For consideration of appointment of the petitioners on the post of District Home Guard, in the district of Jamui, who are the eligible/successful candidates in the selection list made by the respondents authorities.

iv. For passing an interim order not to merge the vacancy of 24 posts in subsequent advertisement.

v. Any other order/orders as your lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. The case of the petitioners in brief is that vide an Advertisement No. 1 of 2009, 136 posts of Home Guards were directed to be filled up for the District of Jamui. The advertisement clearly states that the vacancy was declared on the basis of the district-wise requirement (जजलावार आवशयकता अनुसार) and the candidates would be selected on the basis of district-wise merit list (जजलावार नामांकन के उपरानत).

3. The petitioners were initially shortlisted for physical examination which was held on 16^th September, 2019 and on 21^st of September, 2019, result was published. In spite of petitioners obtaining necessary marks in the physical examination, they were not called for medical examination. Subsequently, when the select-list was prepared, it was found that candidates obtaining lesser marks were selected and the petitioners candidature was rejected. A reason behind this anomaly was due to the fact that in the district of Jamui recruitment of Home Guards were made on the basis of block-

wise vacancy and not on the basis of district-wise vacancy.

4. It is contended by the petitioners that the respondents changed the rule of game of recruitment after it was started which is absolutely arbitrary, bad in law and against the laudable principle of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India .

5. Ms. Adya Pandey, learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioners on being allowed by the learned Senior counsel, Sanjeev Kumar Mishra submits that respondent authority took different stand in respect of selection and appointment of Home Guards in different districts. As for example, it is submitted by Ms. Pandey that in the district of Patna, East Champaran, Purnea and Khagaria district-wise vacancy was taken into consideration though by way of different advertisement but in identical circumstances.

6. The petitioners previously approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 24372 of 2019. The said writ petition was disposed on 7^th of December, 2021 by a Co-ordinate Bench directing the concerned respondent to take note of merit of each petitioners and proceeding to consider and appoint more merited person of the post of Home Guard within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order.

7. Since the concerned respondent failed to carry out the order, the petitioners filed a contempt application being M.J.C. No. 429 of 2022 which was disposed of on 29.06.2022 giving liberty to the petitioners to resort to appr