Vimlesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7780 of 2020 ============================================== Vimlesh Kumar Son of Sri Kailash Sharma, resident of 10, Ansari Hostel, Ranighat, Mahendru, P.S.- Sultanganj, District- Patna, permanent resident of Nokha Bus Stand, near SBI ATM, P.O.- Nokha, P.S. Nokha, District- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Directorate of Land Records and Survey, Department of Reveue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ============================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prashant Sinha For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Khurshid Alam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-09-2020 Heard Mr. Prashant Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Khurshid Alam, learned Additional Advocate General for the State The petitioner had applied for the post of Special Survey Kanungo pursuant to an advertisement no. 4/2019. The candidates were required to furnish certificate of experience with any company, which the petitioner in his capacity as a candidate did furnish. He had given the certificate of a company with which he had worked. The

Patna High Court CWJC No.7780 of 2020(2) dt.21-09-2020 2/3 company had its own C.I.N., which is the corporate identity number of the company. Notwithstanding furnishing of the aforesaid certificate of experience by the petitioner, the same was not taken into account and obviously, therefore, no mark was awarded to the petitioner on the score of the experience gained by the petitioner.

Fortunately for the petitioner, an objection also was invited in case of any grievance amongst the candidates and the petitioner responded to the aforesaid objection by intimating that he had the requisite experience from a company which was having its C.I.N. number.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that perhaps because of some confusion regarding C.I.N. number of the company that the petitioner's experience has not been taken into account. The aforesaid objection has been taken cognizance of by the authorities but the objection does not appear to have been disposed of. No decision has been taken by the authorities as to whether the petitioner is entitled for the mark on the experience certificate which he had offered.

Patna High Court CWJC No.7780 of 2020(2) dt.21-09-2020 3/3 Under such circumstances, this Court directs that in case the present order is brought to the notice of the authorities within a period of two weeks, the objection of the petitioner shall be looked into and a decision shall be taken whether the petitioner is entitled for the marks for experience. In case it is found that he is required to be given marks for his experience on the basis of certificate which he has offered, the same shall be given to him and if by adding the marks of the experience, he comes within the zone of consideration for being appointed to the post of Special Survey Kanungo, necessary order shall be passed in that direction.

The exercise in this regard should be concluded within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) sunilkumar/- U