ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents. 2. The petitioners in the present writ application have challenged the selection list prepared for appointment to the post of Junior Engineers dated 16.09.2011, prepared in pursuance of Memo no. 69 dated 11.04.2011, whereby the Joint Secretary, General Administration, Bihar State Electricity Board ( erstwhile) ( hereinafter referred to as the Board) had requested the Principal Secretary, Science and Technology Department, Government of Bihar to direct all the Polytechnics in the State to send to the Board list of Pre-final year students prepared merit wise on the basis their result up to pre-final year, for the purpose of their selection for appointment on the basis of Campus interview. It is to be noted here that in terms of the provisions under the Electricity Act, 2003 the Bihar State Electricity Board has been reconstituted and as per the present arrangement, it is the Bihar State Power (Holding) Company and four other subsidiary Companies which have taken over the functions of the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board. 3. The decision of the erstwhile Board to select candidates on the basis of Campus Interview, from amongst the students studying in final year in various Polytechnics under the State of Bihar was earlier challenged in a writ application before this Court. This Court while dismissing the said writ application vide order dated 26.07.2011 passed in CWJC No.7200 of 2011 (Preveen Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and ors) reported in 2011 (4) PLJR 214 observed that there were serious deficiencies in the present selection process and the detailed procedure ought to have been formulated by the Board before proceeding with the said selection. This Court, however, ignored such deficiencies while considering the legality of the selection process, in view of the emergent situation and creation of the zone of consideration on a very objective and qualitative basis. 4. It appears that the Campus Interview was held by the Board on 16.04.2011, in which 406 candidates from different polytechnics of the State of Bihar participated for the post of Junior Engineers (Electrical). 4. It appears that the Campus Interview was held by the Board on 16.04.2011, in which 406 candidates from different polytechnics of the State of Bihar participated for the post of Junior Engineers (Electrical). From Annexure-2, which is a communication by the Secretary of Bihar State Electricity Board to the Principal Secretary, Science and Technology, Government of Bihar dated 04.03.2011, it appears that the Board had made a request to furnish a merit list of final year students of said Polytechnics on the basis of their pre final year result. It seems that the merit list so prepared on the basis of the pre-final year result of the candidates is the basis for preparation of final selection list that appointment has to be made of such candidates only who secured 60% aggregate marks in the diploma course, which is under challenge in the present writ application. 5. From the counter affidavit, it appears that offer of the appointment was, however, given to such candidates only who were placed in the merit list and passed final year examination with first division or equivalent. 6. The petitioners’ grievance in the present writ application is limited. According to them, since the selection was based on Campus Interview, some weightage ought to have been attached to interview also and marks obtained up to pre-final year examination should not have been the only criteria for preparing the merit list. According to him, the Board had not decided to exclude the performance of the candidates in the interview for the purpose of preparation of merit list, prior to start of process of selection and such decision to exclude the performance of candidates in the interview after start of the process of selection, amounts to altering the conditions of advertisement or the conditions with which the process of selection had started. He has submitted that assessment of personality of a candidate for selection to the post Junior Electrical Engineer post is an important aspect, which Board should not have ignored. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in (1981) 4 SCC 159 (Lila Dhar Vs. State of Rajasthan) to submit that assessment of academic performance and personality of a candidate is ideal mode of selection, which the Board has failed to follow. He, accordingly, submits that the entire selection should be declared illegal. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in (1981) 4 SCC 159 (Lila Dhar Vs. State of Rajasthan) to submit that assessment of academic performance and personality of a candidate is ideal mode of selection, which the Board has failed to follow. He, accordingly, submits that the entire selection should be declared illegal. According to him, the communication by which the merit list was called for by the Board from the Government Polytechnics through Principal Secretary, Science and Technology, Government of Bihar dated 04.03.2011 is akin to an advertisement, which is issued generally and with which the process of selection starts and in the absence of any provision in the said letter that there would be no weightage for interview, the respondent should not have prepared the merit list, ignoring the performance of the candidate in interview. 7. At the very outset, I must indicate that there is no dispute about the fact that the said Campus Interview was conducted on 16.04.2011 only in course of which altogether 406 candidates were interviewed. On a simple calculation, based on number of candidates interviewed and total time spent for such purpose, it will appear that not more than a minute would have been given for interview to one candidate. Assessment of personality, which the learned counsel for the petitioners has so much emphasized, was in fact not possible for the Board or the persons holding such interview to make within such short span of time. Apparently, the merit list has been prepared on the basis of the marks secured by the candidates as per their performance till pre-final year examination. Such procedure in my opinion, cannot be said to be irrational or without any nexus with the post for which the selection is being made. I find the process to be transparent and on objective basis which aspect has taken note of by a Division Bench of this Court in case of Praveen Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and others (supra). 8. I do not find any infirmity or lack of fairness in the process of selection in the facts and circumstances of the case, and the manner in which the Campus Interview has been conducted, in my opinion, the respondents rightly decided not to attach any weightage to the interview for the purpose of preparation of final selection list. 9. This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed.