Noman Ajam And Ors vs State Of Bihar And Ors

Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned counsel for the Respondent-State, learned counsel for Kendriya Chayan Parishad ( for short KCP). 38 writ petitioners have sought a direction that they be appointed as Constables in the Bihar Police against the vacancies being filled up pursuant to the advertisement dated 11.12.2009. The petitioners all qualified for the written test and it is the case of the petitioners that they have wrongly been excluded in the process of selection as 50% of total advertised vacancies were not filled up from Home guard trained applicants, such as petitioners .

The Central Selection Board of Constable (for brevity "Board") has filed a counter affidavit after due service on petitioners counsel way back on 25.06.2002. It is their specific stand that the physical standards of both the police forces were equal.

The stand of the respondent-Board is that out of 38 petitioners 28 emerged finally selected for the post of Constable under Home Guard quota in different districts/units. In respect of the remaining ten petitioners a stand has been taken with respect to each individual remaining candidates. KCP has stated that petitioner nos. 17,28,29, 21 and 34 have been disqualified and their candidature were rejected due to wrong filling of roll number in the answer sheets. The said petitioners cannot express any grievance in this regard as they have given a clear and unequivocal declaration in the application form that if anything is found wrong or incorrect candidature was liable to be rejected and the legation action initiated against such candidates.

Petitioner No.37 secured 40 marks in the Physical Examination Test whereas cut off in his category of Backward Class Male Home Guard was 60. His rejection is on account of low merit position. Petitioner No.23 secured 13 marks whereas the cut off marks in his category of Backward Class Male Home Guard was 29. His is also a case of rejection on account of low merit position. Petitioner Nos. 31 and 32 participated in the race, wherein, they were required to complete the race of one mile in six minutes. They were disqualified in this Physical Evaluation Test as they could not complete the race within the stipulated time. In respect of petitioner no. 36 it is specific averments of the Board that the in the Physical Evaluation Test the minimum chest requirement was 79-84 cm in his category of Scheduled Castes Male Home Guard, whereas his chest was measured 77-81 cm, i.e. less than the minimum requisite. Accordingly, he too was disqualified on grounds of merits assessment. The Board's counter affidavit clearly discloses the reasons for disqualification or exclusion of the petitioners in the process of selection, which apparently do not require any interference. The said reasons assigned by the Board in its counter affidavit has also not been denied or disputed by the petitioners, for no reply or rejoinder to the counter affidavit has been filed till date. The circumstances, therefore, leave no scope for the petitioners to seek any direction for their appointment as their claims have been rejected in t he process of selection for justifiable reasons, which have never been denied or disputed.

The writ petition is dismissed.