Jitendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13193 of 2015 ====================================================== Jitendra Prasad Son of Yamuna Prasad, Resident of village- Singachapar, P.S.- Muffasil, Bettiah, District- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The D.G. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Chairman Constable Selection Board Advt. No.1/2004 through S.P. Bagaha.

4.

The Superintendent of Police, Bettiah.

5.

The Superintendent of Police, Motihari.

6.

The Superintendent of Police, Bagaha.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ebrahim Kabir, Adv.

Ms. Shruti Sinha, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Indeshwari Prasad, AC to GA 3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 19-12-2022

1. The petitioner by way of this writ petition prays to be considered for appointment on the post of Constable in Bihar Police against the advertisement 01/2004 from Bagaha District. He submits that he appeared in all the test and was successful and obtained 11 marks. However, candidate having equal marks to that of the petitioner but being under in age have been appointed in the category of the petitioner that is B.C. The petitioner has not placed any document to show that he belongs to B.C. category. Per contra, the State Government has filed its reply and placed on record his original application form,

Patna High Court CWJC No.13193 of 2015(2) dt.19-12-2022 2/2 wherein it is reflected that the petitioner has mentioned about his belonging to General category. The contention of the State Government is that is he scored 11 marks and in the merit relating to General category candidates, he could not come within the cut-off as the last candidate selected under the said category scored 13 marks. In view of the stand taken by the S.P. West Champaran, Bettiah in his order dated 16.08.2016, claim of the petitioner for selection is found to be not made out.

2. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Sachin/- Item No. 43 U