Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 664 (PAT)

Sunil Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar

2005-07-29

body2005
ORDER Parties were heard in detail and by order dated 7.3.2005 this Court held that the selection and appointment process leading to appointment of respondent no. 7 was vitiated and hence, his appointment was quashed. The controversy as to whether the qualification of petitioner and respondent no. 7 was equivalent to degree recognised by the University was not decided by this Court because learned counsel for the University pleaded that this matter should be left to be decided by the University itself. It appears that now the University has completed the enquiry into that controversy and has come to a finding that qualification of respondent no. 7 is not equivalent to degree recognised by the University whereas qualification of the petitioner is equivalent to degree recognised by the University. 2. At this stage, the parties were heard again. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 7 wanted to assail the findings of the enquiry committee constituted by the University to the extent it was against respondent no. 7. A copy of the enquiry report has been served upon learned counsel for the respondent no. 7 today itself. In the facts of the case, this Court is not persuaded to enlarge the scope of this writ petition and decide the grievances of respondent no. 7 in respect of result of enquiry by the University in respect of his qualification. But in the interest of justice, liberty is granted that if so advised, respondent no.7 may challenge the decision of the University regarding his qualification before appropriate authority or through appropriate forum in accordance with law. 3. It goes without saying that the University shall complete the selection process pursuant to advertisement no. 2/98 for the post in question as per law because the earlier appointment of respondent no. 7 has already been quashed by this Court by order dated 7.3.2005. That order shall be treated as part of this order. It is expected that the University shall complete the selection and appointment process arising out of advertisement no. 2/98 at an early date, preferably within three months. The writ petition is allowed to -the aforesaid extent.