Ravindra Prasad v. Bihar Public Service Commission And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5268 of 2014 =========================================================== Ravindra Prasad, Son Of Late Shiv Prasad, Resident Of Village- Jhanjharpur, Mohalla- Langra Chowk, Police Station- Jhanjharpur, District- Madhubani .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Bihar Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, 15, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road

2. The Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission 15, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna- 800001

3. The Examination Controller-Cum-Additional Secretary Bihar Public Service Commission, 15, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna- 800001

4. The State of Bihar

5. The Principal Secretary, General Administration department, Government of Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suraj Narain Yadav For the B.P.S.C. :

Mr. Sanjay Pandey For the State:

Mr. Ravish Chandra =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 11-03-2016 Petitioner is one of the unsuccessful candidates in the examination held by Bihar Public Service Commission, which was known as 3rd Bihar Finance Service Limited Competitive Examination, 2010. The advertisement was Advertisement No. 14 of 2010.

After the examination, results were published. Model answers and questions were put on the web-site. Objections were invited. Based on the response, an expert committee did the moderation and the final evaluation of answers and publication of results was based on the said exercise.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5268 of 2014 dt.11-03-2016 2/2 Since petitioner failed to make it in the said examination, he decided to file the writ application on the ground that certain questions and answers were wrong.

The exercise and time for raising objections is well passed over. It can not be an on-going process indefinitely at the instance of the unsuccessful candidates.

All those objections, including that of the petitioner, had been taken into consideration. Even if the objection of the petitioner is accepted on the face value, it does not help the petitioner much, because admitted position is that the petitioner got 159.60 marks in the said examination. He belongs to the EBC category and the last candidate, who was selected and appointed on the basis of the said examination, has 214.13 marks.

Petitioner is miles away from the merit position. Therefore, this is a desperate effort made on behalf of the petitioner for taking a chance by filing the present writ application. Writ application has no merit, it is dismissed. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) SKM/- U