Judgment D. P. Wadhwa and j. JJ. 1. All the four writ applications pertain to appointment to the post of Commercial Taxes officers in pursuance of "first Bihar finance Service (Limited) Competitive examination, 1991". As such these were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. In C. W. J. C. No.4828 of 1994, the petitioners have alleged use of unfair means in the examination and have prayed for re-evaluation of answersheets of all the examinees and not to make any appointment on the basis of the recommendations already made. A similar prayer has been made in c. W. J. C. No.5318 of 1994 with a further prayer for cancellation of the examination aforesaid. The petitioner in c. W. J. C. No.10489 of 1994 has, however, prayed for a direction to the respondents to appoint him to the post of Commercial Taxes Officer (for short cto) by treaiing him as eligible on the date of making application. The two petitioners of C. WJ. C No.3074 of 1995 claim to be successful candidates. They have prayed for a direction to the respondents to fill up further four existing vacancies which occurred by March 31, 1994 and then to consider the cases of the petitioners as well for their appointments. 3. The common facts of the cases show that 53 vacancies of CTO were advertised on October 24, 199j in different news-papers, including a Hindi newspaper "aaj" for filling up the same from amongst specified employees of the State Government working in different departments of the State of bihar. The examination was known as "first Bihar Finance Service (Limited)Competitive Examination, 1991". The petitioners of all the cases, along with others applied for such appointments. They were provided with admit cards to take part in the said examination. The examination could not be held upto 1993 for certain reasons and ultimately it was held on April 24, 1994. The result of successful candidates were published on May 1, 1994. By the year 1993, 19 more vacancies occurred. 4. As the examination itself was held on April 24, 1994, the respondent-State made a requisition for filling up some more posts out of the same ex-amination and requisition came to 72 in number (53 already advertised plus 19 more for which requisition was made ). By the year 1993, 19 more vacancies occurred. 4. As the examination itself was held on April 24, 1994, the respondent-State made a requisition for filling up some more posts out of the same ex-amination and requisition came to 72 in number (53 already advertised plus 19 more for which requisition was made ). The candidates, who were declared suc-cessful, were called for interview and after due interview they were selected and given appointment to the posts of cto. Already 72 posts have been filled up out of the successful candidates of first competitive examination of 1991. 5. In the meantime by letter No.7031 dated September 9,1994, the State of Bihar made requisition with respect to four posts of CTO which fell vacant at the end of March, 1994. The Bihar public Service Commission (for short bpsc) was requested to lake steps to fill up these four posts out of second bihar Finance Service (Limited) Com-petitive Examination. 6. So far as the two petitioners, Dr arvind Kumar Singh and Sadan Sharma (of C. W. J. C. No.3074/95) are con-cerned, they are successful candidates. However, they have not come within the zone of appointment out of 72 vacan-cies. They have not been provided with such appointment. According to them, if the four vacancies which occurred by march 31, 1994 are filled up out of the first competitive examination, they being next in the merit list to the person already appointed, they will be ap-pointed to the posts. 7. So far as petitioner Md. Mu/af-far Alam (of C. W. J. C. No.10489 of 1994) is concerned, he was allowed to appear in such competitive examina-tion. He has also come out successful in the said examination but his name was not recommended treating him to be not eligible at the time of application as he was not a confirmed employee by the date he applied which was one of the stipulations. 8. The petitioners of the rest two writ application (C. W. J. C. Nos.4828 and 5318 of 1994) consist of successful and unsuccessful candidates but they have not been provided with appointment as were not within the zone of merit. Similarly successful candidates in c. W. J. C. No.3074 of 1995 also could not get appointment being not within the zone of merit. Dr. Arvind Kumar singh is the common petitioner in two writ petitions. Similarly successful candidates in c. W. J. C. No.3074 of 1995 also could not get appointment being not within the zone of merit. Dr. Arvind Kumar singh is the common petitioner in two writ petitions. While in C. W. J. C. No.3074 of 1995 Dr. Arvind Kumar Singh, along with another prayed for appoint-ment out of the first competitive ex-amination, the same very person in c. W. J. C. No.4828 of 1994 has prayed for cancellation of the very examination on the ground of adoption of unfair means. 9. In the aforesaid background, counsel for the petitioners of different writ applications made their respective submissions to support their conten-tion. Some of the successful candidates and those who have already been ap-pointed have been made party-respon-dents in some of the writ applications. There are some other persons, already appointed in pursuance of the said ex-amination, who have been impleaded as party-respondents on their intervention petition. All the aforesaid respondents as well as the State of Bihar have been heard. C. WJ. C. Nos.4828 and 5318 of 1994: 10. In these two cases, it has been alleged that unfair means was adopted during the first competitive examination and so a prayer has been made for re-evaluation of answer-sheets/cancellation of examination itself. It is stated that five examination centres were fixed for the first competitive examination, namely, (i) Central School, Sheikhpura, patna, (ii) K. B. Sahay, High School, shashtri Nagar, Patna, (iii) Daya Nand balika Uchya Vidyalaya, Mithapur, patna, (iv) Daya Nand Balak Uchya vidyalaya Mithapur, Patna and (v) Gar-danibagh Uchya Vidyalaya, Patna. The petitioners have alleged that when the results of 71 candidates were published for appointment out of different category-persons,, successful candidates have been shown from one or other centre in vastly different proportions. It is stated that out of 71 successful candidates, 37 were shown to be successful from Daya Nand Balak Uchya vidyalaya, Mithapur, Patna whereas only 8 candidates were shown to be successful from Central School, sheikhpura Centre. Similarly only five candidates have been shown successful from K. B. Sahay High School, Shashtn nagar Centre, seven successful candidates from Daya Nand Balika Uchya vidyalaya, Mithapur, Patna and 14 from gardanibagh High School, Patna. Similarly only five candidates have been shown successful from K. B. Sahay High School, Shashtn nagar Centre, seven successful candidates from Daya Nand Balika Uchya vidyalaya, Mithapur, Patna and 14 from gardanibagh High School, Patna. This is the main ground shown by the petitioners to allege unfair means as according to them without such unfair means largest number of candidates could not have come out successful from one centre, namely, Daya Nand balika Uchya Vidyalaya, Mithapur, patna. 11. It is further alleged that a number of persons, who were not eligible for appointment being not confirmed at the time of making of application, have been declared successful and appointed including one Shri Ram Kishore Prasad with Roll No.2035. This example has been cited by the petitioners to show that favour has been shown to eligible candidates and it has been alleged that examination was not conducted in a proper manner. The petitioners have claimed that they should have been provided much more higher marks in the written test which was objective in nature but marking has not been made properly which is another ground taken by the petitioners to assail the examination in question. 12. The petitioners of C. W. J. C. No.5318 of 1994 have also tried to highlight the questions which were asked to show that some of the questions were absurd. 13. We find that the allegations made by the petitioner are general and vague. No specific instance has been shown relating to use of unfair means in any one or other centre. The petitioners have not alleged any mala fide against any individual officer of the State and/of bpsc to show that any of them was interested in any candidate. If more persons came out successful out of a particular centre and less persons from other centre, it cannot be presumed that unfair means was resorted to in the particular centre from where more candidates were declared successful. 14. So far as selection and appointment of any ineligible person, including ram Kishore Prasad, is concerned, on that ground the whole selection and appointment cannot be held to be vitiated. At best a person can challenge the appointment of such other ineligible candidate. In these cases Ram Kishore prasad has not been made a party-respondent nor his appointment is under challenge. So we refrain from giving any opinion relating to his appointment. At best a person can challenge the appointment of such other ineligible candidate. In these cases Ram Kishore prasad has not been made a party-respondent nor his appointment is under challenge. So we refrain from giving any opinion relating to his appointment. So far as absurd questions are concerned, in absence of questionpaper and specific pleading, no finding can be given by this Court. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the two writ petitions. C. W. J. C. Nos.4828 and 5318 of 1994 are accordingly dismissed. C. W. J. C. No.10489 of 1994 15. To appreciate the present case, it is necessary to discuss the rule and the advertisement where in eligibility criteria has been laid down. The Rule is commonly known as bihar Finance Service (Appointment through Selection)Rules, 1990. Rule 5 stipulates the eligibility of candidates, which is being set out here under:- "5. Eligibility of candidates:- Candidates for appointment in service through limited competitive examination: a. (i) shall be a graduate from any recognised University, (ii) shall be continuously working for minimum 10 years and confirmed in class ii! grade on 1st April in the year of application, (hi) shall not be over 45 years of age on 1st April in the year of application and shall not participate for more than three chances. B. It is limited competitive examination. " 16 The advertisement was issued on October 24,1991 in which December 16, 1991 was the last date fixed for receipt of the applications. At that point of time only 53 posts were advertised. Subsequently for 19 more vacancies, requisition was made on January 12,1994, when another advertisement was issued calling for further applications which were to be made by April, 1994. 17. Petitioner Md. Muzaffar Alam (of C. W. J. C. No.10489 of 1994) was already functioning as Labour Enforcement officer under the State of Bihar. Admittedly he was not a confirmed employee till December 16, 1991 which was the last date of application. In spue of the same, he was provided with admit card on April 15, 1994 with Roll No.1490. After the examination the BPSC informed the petitioner Md. Muzaffar alam by letter dated May 20, 1994 that from the documents submitted by him, it was found that he was not confirmed till April 1, 1991, i. e. the cut off date, according to the Rule. After the examination the BPSC informed the petitioner Md. Muzaffar alam by letter dated May 20, 1994 that from the documents submitted by him, it was found that he was not confirmed till April 1, 1991, i. e. the cut off date, according to the Rule. He was asked to submit his reply to the same. Md. Muzaffar Alam initially did not choose to give any reply and when reminder was given by the BPSC by letter dated July 7,1994, he intimated that his case for confirmation was pending before the State and he had already been confirmed since December 1, 1985 and so he was eligible for appointment. What happened was that in the meantime after the letter of the BPSC dated April 15,1994 by which a query was made, the respondent State in Labour, Employment and Training Department came out with one order dated July 5,1994 by which petitioner Md. Muzaffar Alam was confirmed from retrospective date with effect from December 1,1985. It is for the said reason that while reply, on reminder, was submitted by petitioner md. Muzaffar Alam on July 13,1994, he intimated that he was confirmed since december 1, 1985 and thart so he was eligible as on April 1, 1991 and there was nothing wrong in allowing him to appear in the examination. This is the stand which has been taken by the petitioner Md. Muzaffar Alam in the present application. However, the respondent did not accept the aforesaid submission on the ground that he was not confirmed on April 1 of the year when advertisement was issued and so he was not eligible. 18. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in another case in the case of Ram Kishore Prasad v. The State of Bihar and others (C. W. J. C. No.8744 of 1994 disposed of on 30-1-1995)a learned single Judge of this court allowed the petitioner in that case to appear in the examination and then to consider his case for appointment on the post of CTO and he in fact was appointed, though the order of confirmation was issued on July 27, 1994 from retrospective date, with effect from 13-3-1988. Similar instance of Nageshwar Ram, he petitioner of C. W. J. C. No.1657 of 1995, has also been cited. This case was disposed of on 7-8-1995. Similar instance of Nageshwar Ram, he petitioner of C. W. J. C. No.1657 of 1995, has also been cited. This case was disposed of on 7-8-1995. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner when Ram Kishore Prasad and Nageshwar Ram (supra) have been granted such relief by his Court, similar relief should be granted in favour of the present petitioner as well. 19. We have already cited the relevant rule and the advertisement issued for first competitive examination. According to Rule 5 aforesaid a person must be confirmed Class III employee of the State as on April 1, in the year of application. The first advertisement for the first competitive examination was issued on October 24, 1991. Admittedly the petitioner had not been confirmed by April 1, 1991, the year of application, nor the order of confirmation was issued by the last date of submission of such application. The petitioner was thus neither eligible in terms of Rule 5 aforesaid, not in terms of the advertisement. The subsequent corrigendum/ad-vertisement was issued in 1994 by which applications were called for further 19 posts to be filled up out of same First competitive Examination which was to be submitted by April 1, 1994. Admittedly the order of confirmation had not been issued even by April 1, 1994, i. e. the subsequent advertisement in pursuance of which applications could have been filed. The petitioner was not eligible, even by April 1, 1994, either in terms of the statutory Rule 5 or in terms of the advertisement of the year 1994, the order of confirmation having been issued only in July, 1994, though with a retrospective date. 20. The Supreme Court in the case of U. P Public Service Commission U. P. , allahabad and another V/s. Alpana, (1994) 2 scc 723 , held that the eligibility condition relating to date for fulfilment can at best be the last date of receipt of applications, if no statutory rule is in existence. In the case of Mills Douglas michael and others V/s. Union of India and others reported in A. I. R.1996 S. C.1905, the Supreme Court specifically held that the cut off date of eligibility is the last date of filing of applications in absence of statutory rule. In the case of Mills Douglas michael and others V/s. Union of India and others reported in A. I. R.1996 S. C.1905, the Supreme Court specifically held that the cut off date of eligibility is the last date of filing of applications in absence of statutory rule. In the present case, the petitioner was neither confirmed on the cut off date in accordance with Rule 5 aforesaid (as on April 1, 1991 or April 1, 1994)nor he was confirmed by the cut off date of filing of applications (19-12-1991 or April 30, 1994), the notification of confirmation having not been issued by that time. Such being the position, in terms of the decisions of the supreme Court, the petitioner cannot be held to be eligible for appointment to the post of CTO in pursuance of the first competitive examination. There being specific decision of the Supreme court, we are not inclined to rely on single Judge decisions of this Court in the cases of Ram Kishore Prasad and nageshwar Ram (Supra) which in our opinion do not lay correct law. It was stated at the Bar that Letters Patent appeals have been filed against the aforesaid decisions of the learned single judge. We do not think that because of pendency of those appeals we should not say anything that may affect the rcsult of those appeals. It would be lor ihe Bench hearing the appeals to consider the matter in its proper perspective. For the reasons stated above, we find no merit in the writ application. C. WJ. C. No.10489 of 1994 is accordingly dismissed. C. WJ. C. No.3074 of 1995 21. In this case, as stated above, a prayer has been made to fill up the rest of four vacancies occurred by March 31, 1994, which had been requisitioned for filling up out of second competitive examination by letter No.7031 dated September 9,1994. 22. In the preceding paragraphs we have taken into note that initially 53 posts were requisitioned for which advertisement was published on October 24, 1991. Subsequently 19 more posts were requisitioned for filling up the posts out of the same first competitive examination which were also notified by advertisement issued in March-April, 1994. Thereby altogether 72 (53 + 19)vacancies were notified by advertisements for filling up the posts out of first competitive examination. 23. Subsequently 19 more posts were requisitioned for filling up the posts out of the same first competitive examination which were also notified by advertisement issued in March-April, 1994. Thereby altogether 72 (53 + 19)vacancies were notified by advertisements for filling up the posts out of first competitive examination. 23. A similar matter came up for consideration before the Supreme court in the case of State of Bihar and another V/s. Madan Mohan Singh and others reported in A. I. R.1994 S. C.765. The Supreme Court held as follows:- "it is therefore crystal clear that the advertisement and the whole selection process that ensued were meant only to fill up 32 vacancies. Learned Counsel for the respondents relying on the decisions of this Court in Kailash Chandra Sharma V/s. State of Haryana, 1989 Suppl (2) SCC 696; ( AIR 1990 SC 454 ) and O. P. Garg V/s. State of U. P. , AIR 1991 SC 1202 , contended that when there are temporary vacancies, the direct recruits should have their share of quota in respect of tempprary vacancies also. As noted above, the temporary vacancies arose subsequently but even otherwise in the view we are taking namely that the particular advertisement and the consequent selec-tion process were meant only to fill up 32 vacancies and not to fill up the other vacancies, the merit list prepared on the basis of the written test as well as the viva voce will hold good only for the purpose of filling up those 32 vacancies and no further because the said process of selection for those 32 vacancies got exhausted and came to an end. If the same list has to be kept subsisting for the purpose of filling up other vacancies also that would naturally amount to deprivation of rights of other candidates who would have became eligible subsequent to the said advertisement and selection process. " 24. If the same list has to be kept subsisting for the purpose of filling up other vacancies also that would naturally amount to deprivation of rights of other candidates who would have became eligible subsequent to the said advertisement and selection process. " 24. The Supreme Court took the same view in the case of Madanlal and others V/s. State of J. and K. and others reported in (1995) 3 Supreme Court cases 486, wherein the Supreme Court held as follows:- "in the present case as the requisition is for 11 posts and even though the commission might have sent list of 20 selected candidates, appointments to be affected out of the said list would be on 11 posts and not beyond 11 posts, as discussed by us earlier. This contention will stand accepted to the extent indicated here in above. " "the moment these 11 posts are filled up within one year of the publication of list at Annexure-C, this list will get exhausted or if for any reason those 11 vacancies could not be filled up by the time one year from the date of publication of the list is over, even then the list would get exhausted and fresh recruitment will have to be made in the light of fresh requisition from the State. . . . . " In view of the decisions of the supreme Court aforesaid, according to us there being 72 posts requisitioned only those posts could be filled up, and rightly have been filled up, in pursuance of first competitive examination. The rest of the vacancies requisitioned by letter No.7031 dated September 9,1994 having not been advertised cannot be filled up in pursuance of first competitive examination. We thus find no merit in this writ petition. Accordingly c. W. J. C. No.3074 of 1995 is dismissed. 25 For the reasons stated above, all the four writ applications, namely, c. W. J. C. Nos.4828, 5318 and 10489 of 1994 and C. W. J. C. No.3074 of 1995 stand dismissed. However, on the facts and circumstances of the cases, there will be no order as to costs. Petition Dismissed.