JUDGMENT By Court: The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction upon the respondents to rectify the defect in the result published by the Bihar Public Service Commission, wherein the petitioner's name has been shown against 'Backward Caste' category candidate though, he belongs to the 'General' category. A further prayer has been made seeking a direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to work and pay full salary in terms of direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 7357 of 1996. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Paid Manager on 20.09.1976 on consolidated pay of Rs.200/per month. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Cooperative Manager vide order dated 27.03.1982. On 06.09.1986, the Government of Bihar took a decision to absorb the Paid Managers in the equivalent posts in other government departments. Thereafter, 113 Paid Managers were appointed in the year, 1987 on different posts in the P.H.E. Department under the Government of Bihar. Subsequently, those 113 Paid Managers were retrenched however, they were reappointed after the decision by the Hon'ble Patna High Court, against which a Special Leave Petition was filed which was dismissed on 25.10.1994. 3. A writ petition being CWJC No. 2312 of 1991 was filed by Bihar Rajya Sahkarita Prabandhak Seva Sangh before the Hon'ble Patna High Court seeking a direction for absorption of Paid Managers on equivalent posts in other government departments in terms of government's decision dated 06.09.1986. By order dated 01.12.1994, a direction was issued by the Hon'ble Patna High Court to the Government of Bihar to absorb/appoint the Paid Managers on vacant sanctioned post in ClassIII. Special Leave Petition was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and during the pendency of the Civil Appeal No.7357 of 1996, the Bihar Public Service Commission advertised 4014 posts. The Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the State of Bihar to consider appointing the Paid Managers against the advertised vacancy. By order dated 20.08.1998, the Civil Appeal No.7357 of 1996 was disposed of with certain directions. Pursuant to the direction passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, an advertisement was again issued on 09.04.2000 by Bihar Public Service Commission for holding limited competitive examination for filling up 1750 ClassIII posts. Pursuant to Advertisement No.01/2000, the petitioner filled up application under 'General' category candidate. The petitioner mentioned reservation category “01” indicating that he belongs to 'General' category. Pursuant to the direction passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, an advertisement was again issued on 09.04.2000 by Bihar Public Service Commission for holding limited competitive examination for filling up 1750 ClassIII posts. Pursuant to Advertisement No.01/2000, the petitioner filled up application under 'General' category candidate. The petitioner mentioned reservation category “01” indicating that he belongs to 'General' category. The petitioner was declared successful in the first phase of examination and accordingly, the petitioner was offered appointment on ClassIII post in Chatra district. The petitioner gave his joining on 14.02.2001 however, when he knew that his name has been shown under the 'Backward Caste' category, he immediately represented to the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra that he belongs to 'General' Category. The petitioner continued to work however, he was not paid salary. In the meantime, second and third phase of examinations were held in which, the petitioner could not appear as the respondents did not intimate any decision with respect to the representation made by the petitioner for correcting the mistake whereby, he was shown belonging to the 'Backward Caste' category. In the aforesaid facts, the petitioner has approached this Court. 4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the contesting respondents stating that the petitioner declared himself belonging to the Backward Caste and therefore, his selection was made in the said category. On 21.06.2013, this Court passed the following order:- “Respondent nos.4 and 5 are directed to produce the record including the form and documents submitted by the petitioner to B.P.S.C. within a period of four weeks. The record, if not available with the Respondent nos. 4 and 5, would be requisitioned through special messenger and produced in Court within time. Post the matter on 26.07.2013. Let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the parties.” 5. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 21.06.2013, the original record was produced in the Court and I have perused the same. The learned counsel appearing for the parties were also permitted to peruse the original form filled in by the petitioner himself. 6. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 21.06.2013, the original record was produced in the Court and I have perused the same. The learned counsel appearing for the parties were also permitted to peruse the original form filled in by the petitioner himself. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that though, the petitioner belongs to 'General' category candidate and he had been working for the last more than 19 years and therefore, the category to which he belongs was known to the respondents, in the form filled in by the petitioner mischievously, his category code was changed from “01” to “07”. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that a bare look at the original form makes it apparent that, someone has made interpolation in the original form submitted by the petitioner. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that there is no reason why someone in the Commission would make interpolation in the form submitted by the petitioner. It is further submitted that, since the facts pleaded by the petitioner has been disputed by the respondents, this Court may not entertain the writ petition and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents on record. 9. Referring to the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that interpolation made in the original form submitted by the petitioner is apparent, I am of the view that whether it is an interpolation or a correction made by the petitioner himself, is a question of fact, which cannot be determined in a writ proceeding. Before, the contention of the counsel for the petitioner is accepted, the matter is required to be examined by the handwriting expert and evidence has to be led by the petitioner to establish that interpolation in the original form submitted by him has been done by some other person. I further find that pursuant to direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, limited competitive examination was to be held in three phases and examinations for all the three phases have been held before 2004 itself. It is more than 13 years since the Advertisement No.01/2000 was issued pursuant to which the petitioner had applied. I further find that pursuant to direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, limited competitive examination was to be held in three phases and examinations for all the three phases have been held before 2004 itself. It is more than 13 years since the Advertisement No.01/2000 was issued pursuant to which the petitioner had applied. Though the writ petition was filed in the year, 2004 itself, I am of the view that at this stage, no positive direction can be issued by this Court. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed on the ground that it involves disputed question of fact. However, liberty is reserved with the petitioner to seek any other remedy, if available in law.