BIHAR STATE UNEMPLOYED CIVIL ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, SH. RANJIT RANA AND ORS. ETC. versus THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 94 · Decided: 08-04-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

• 
A 
BIHAR STATE UNEMPLOYED CIVIL ENGINEERS 
ASSOCIATION THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, SH. 
RANJIT RANA AND ORS. ETC. 
v. 
THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. 
B 
APRIL 8, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAl~, JJ.] 
Se1vice Law : 
c 
Road/Building constmction and Public Works Department of State 
Govenunent of Biha1~Assista11t Engineers in waiting list prepared by Public 
Se1vice Commission for appointment-High Court giving direction to State 
Govemment to identify vacancies existing as on 31.12.1987 and available for 
appointment from among candidates in waiting list-High Court not satisfied 
D with the stand of the State that no vacancies existed-Held, Govenunent 
would make fresh exercise to identify the vacancies. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 7516-17 
of 1996 Etc. 
E 
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.11.93 of the Patna High 
Court in C.W.J.C. No. 2093 of 1989 and 3072 of 1990. 
Gopal Subramaniam, Santosh Kumar and K.L. Mehta & Co for 
Appellants. 
F 
B.B. Singh and R.P. Wadhwani for the Respondents,. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
..-
,__ 
Delay condoned. 
G 
Leave granted. 
We have heard learned counsel on both sides. 
The writ petitioners in the High Court as well as the State have come 
up in these appeals. It is not necessary for us to elaborate all the material 
H facts and also the contentions advanced in the High Court. Suffice it to 
94 
f 
' 
i 
BIHAR STATE UNEMPLOYED CIVIL ENG RS. ASSN. v. STATE 
95 
state that the High Court of Patna in the impugned order dated November A 
21, 1995 in CWJC Nos. 2093/89 and 3072/90 directed the Government to 
identify the vacancies existing as on December 31, 1987 and available for 
appointment from among the candidates in the waiting list as recom-
mended by the Public Service Commission to the Assistant Engineers 
(Civil). The High Court also found that the 200 posts earmarked by the B 
Government in their resolution dated June 16, 1987 were intended for 
Engineers in Rural Engineering Organisation but the writ petitioners have 
no right to be appointed up to those posts from the wait listed candid;ites. 
Shri Gopal Subramaniam, learned senior counsel appearing for the 
writ petitioners contended that since the Public Service Commission had C 
rejected the request of the State Government to regularise the ad hoc 
employees holding these 200 posts in the Government Resolution dated 
June 16, 1987, those posts should be made available to the candidates who 
are wait listed. We find no force in the contention. It is seen that those 200 
posts are meant to the Rural Engineering Organisation and not for D 
Road/Building Construction and Public Works Department. Under those 
circumstances, the necessary consequence would be that those 200 posts 
should be made available for direct recruitment through the Public Service 
Commission and the eligible candidates would apply for and get the 
selection according to rules for appointment to those posts. It would be 
open to the ad hoc employees also to apply for direct recruitment and seek E 
selection according to rules. 
With regard to the direction given by the Higb Court to identify the 
existing vacancies as on December. 31, 1987 as per the Resolution of the 
Government for being filled up by the wait listed candidates, we find no p 
exception to the direction given by the High Court, on the peculiar facts in 
this case. It is true that the court cam1ot give direction to fill up vacancies from 
the waiting list after the lapse of one year. But in thi' case, the High Court 
had given exception to the principle. An interim direction given earlier to keep 
the waiting list alive was in operation till the disposal of the writ petition. The 
Higb Court has also found that on the basis of the material on record, it WdS G 
not possible for the court to record any finding as to the number of vacancies 
existing as on December 31, 1987 so as to give direction to ftll up those posts 
from the candidates available in the wailiAg list. 
~ ''it is then contended for the Stale that a positive stand taken and the H 
96 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A 
material placed before the High Court was that the vac~ncies meant for 
the general candidates have already been filled up and that there were no 
vacancies existing as on that date. It is true that the State has taken that 
stand. But the High Court did not feel satisfied to accept the Government's 
contention that no posts were availabl
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.