STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. versus RAMJEE PRASAD AND ORS.

Citation: [1990] 2 S.C.R. 468 · Decided: 11-04-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.M. AHMADI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. 
v. 
RAMJEE PRASAJ? AND ORS. 
APRIL 11, 1990 
B 
[A.M. AHMADI AND M. FATHIMA BEEVI, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, !950-Article 14-Last date for receipt of 
app/ications-ffration of by the Government in the advertisement-
W hether can be struck down. 
The State of Bihar published an advertisement inviting applica-
C 
tions for appointments to the junior teaching posts in medical colleges in 
the State of Bihar. For the post of Assistant Professor, only such officers 
who had worked as Resident or Registrar in Medical Hospitals recog-
nised for imparting M.B.B.S. studies by the Medical Council of India 
and having three years experience of such post were considered eligible. 
D The last date for receipt of applications was fixed as 31st January 1988. 
Pursuant to the said advertisement, applications from eligible candi-
dates were received and a select list or panel was prepared for appoint-
ments to the respective posts. The respondents and some other inter-
vcnors who were working then in the Medical colleges as junior 
teachers challenged the State action in fixing the 31st of January 1988 as 
E the cut-off date for receipt of applications for the advertised posts, as 
they had by then not completed three years which was prescribed as the 
requisite experience. It was contended by them that the cut-off date was 
arbitrarily fixed and was therefore violative of Article 14 of the Con-
stitution. The High Court took the view that the State Government in 
fixing the 3 lst January !988 as the cut-off date, had deviated from its 
p 
usual practice of fixing the cut-off date as 30th of June of the relevant 
year. Hence this appeal by the State of Bihar by special leave .. 
It is contended by the State that the decision of the High Court 
was based on an erroneous premise that the cut-off date for eligibility .I 
purposes was 'always' fixed as 30th of June of the relevant year in the 
G 
past. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court. 
HELD: The past practice was to fix the last date for receipt of 
y 
applications a month or one and a half months after the date of actual 
~ 
H 
publication of the advertisement. Following the past practice the State 
468 
·-...._ 
STATE OF BIHAR v. RAMJEE PRASAD !AHMADI, J.] 
469 
Government fixed the last date for receipt of applications as 31st 
January 1988. These who had completed the required experience of 
three years by that date were. therefore. eligible to apply for the posts· 
in question. [474G-H] 
The choice of date cannot be dubbed as arbitrary even if no 
particular reason is forth-coming for the same unless it is shown to be 
capricious or whimsical or wide-off the reasonable mark. The choice of 
lhe date for advertising the post had to depend on several factors, e.g., 
the number of vacancies in different disciplines, the need to till up the 
posts, the availability of candidates etc .. [475C-D] 
Merely because the respondents and some others would qualify 
for appointment if the last date for receipt of applications is shilled 
.from J !st January 1988 to 30th June 1988, is no reason for dubbing the 
earlier date as arbitrary or irrational. [4750] 
A 
B 
c 
The High Court was clearly in error in striking down the Govern-
ment's action of fixing the last date for receipt of application as 31st 
D 
Janua~y 1988 as arbitrary. [475E] 
Municipal Board, Pratabgarh & Anr. v. Mahendra Singh Chawla 
& Ors., [1982] 3 S.C.C. 331; Union of India & Anr. v. M/s. 
Parameswaran Match Works & Ors., [1975] 1 S.C.C. 305 and Uttar 
Pradesh Mahavidyalaya Tadarth Shikshak Niyamitikaran Abhiyan 
Samiti, Varanasi v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., [1987] 2 S.C.C. 453, 
referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1837 
of 1990. 
E 
F 
~-
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.1.1989 of the Patna High 
Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4276of 1988. 
A. Sharan for the Appellants. 
Pankaj Kalra and Pramod Swamp for the Respondents. 
G 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
r 
AHMADI, J. Delay condoned. Special leave granted. 
This appeal arises out of the decision of the Patna High Court 
H 
470 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1990] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
whereby it struck down the selection made for appointments in the 
junior teaching posts in medical colleges in the State and directed a 
fresh selection list to be prepared after shifting the last date for receipt 
of applications to 30th June, 1988. The facts giving rise to this appeal, 
briefly stated, are as under. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
IF 
The 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.