Radhe Shyam Singh vs State of Bihar and Others

Narayan Roy, J.—Heard counsel for the parties.

The sole contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the objection filed by the petitioner before publication of the gradation list has not been considered.

It appears from the materials on record that the Petitioner earlier had moved this Court along with Shiv Nandan Prasad and others for the same self grievance in CWJC No. 9322 of 1994. However, the writ application was permitted to be withdrawn vide order dated 2.5.1999 on the ground that the grievance of the petitioners was pre-mature.

In the meantime, a gradation list was published, so far the petitioner and some other persons are concerned vide Annexure-F to the counter affidavit dated 9.4.1999, where name of the petitioner has been shown at serial No. 4. The petitioner in this writ application is not making any grievance against Annexure F to the counter affidavit and has tried to persuade the Court to consider his came according to his past records, where he was already given B.Sc. trained scale in 1981 itself.

I have already noticed above that in the year 1994 the prayer of this petitioner was found to be pre-mature even considering the fact that the petitioner was already given B.Sc. trained scale in the year 1981.

The petitioner, in that view of the matter, may have his grievances after 1994 and that also after publication of the gradation list, as contained in Annexure F, referred to above, but no grievance has been made against the gradation list. The contention of the petitioner, in my opinion, can be appreciated with reference to the gradation list to show as to whether his objection, if any, was considered or not.

In that view of the matter, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ application.

It is, accordingly, dismissed.