Shashi Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 192 of 2015 =========================================================== Shashi Kumari Daughter of Sri Shankar Prasad Mandal, resident of MohallaPildouri, Near Congress Office, P.O. and P.S. Sultanganj, District- Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Health, Department of Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna

4. Bihar Staff Selection Commission, P.O. Veterinary College, Patna- 14 through its Secretary

5. The Secretary, Staff Selection Commission Bihar, P.O. Veterinary College, Patna- 14 .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Dr Manoj Kumar, Ms Sweety Sinha, Advocates For the B S S C : Mr Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 29-01-2018 Heard counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent-Commission.

2 Matter has been pending since 2015. Despite repeated adjournments, counter affidavit has not been filed. 3 Counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the procedure for selection, which is contained in Annexure 3 of the writ petition, the petitioner was entitled to some marks under Clause 4 (ka) as well as (ga). He submits that, whether the petitioner was entitled to selection or not, could be determined only if the marks obtained by her in the interview under clause (ga) were made known to her. Nonsupply of the marks obtained by her in the interview leave room for

Patna High Court CWJC No.192 of 2015 dt.29-01-2018 2/2 arbitrariness and as per her information from different sources, she has come to know that candidates, holding lesser consolidated marks than her, have been selected whereas she has not been selected. Such assertion of the petitioner has been made in paragraph 9 of the writ petition but without any details of the persons holding lesser marks. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that if the marks, awarded to the petitioner in the interview, are made known to her only then she would know whether her case has been considered or not.

4 In view of the aforesaid submissions, no useful purpose would be served to keep the matter pending any further and the writ petition can be disposed of with a direction upon the respondent-Commission to make available the marks secured by the petitioner in the interview within a period of eight weeks from today. Upon furnishing of such details, it would be open to the petitioner to take steps in accordance with law for raising her grievance, if any. 5 With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 30.01.2018 Transmission Date NA