Km Poonam Dahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10334 of 2025 ====================================================== Km Poonam Dahni, D/o of Ram Sahni, Resident of Mohalla-Kariram, P.O. Nuaon P.S.-Nuaon, District-Kaimur (Bhabua).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar.
2.
The Central Selection Board of Constable, Bihar, Patna. 3.
The Examination Controller, the Central Selection Board of Constable, Bihar, Patna.
4.
The Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, Bihar, Patna. 5.
The Inspector General, Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mrs. Nutan Sahay, AC to AAG-12 For the C.S.B.C.
:
Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Binod Kumar Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Vivek Anand Amritesh, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-07-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction upon the respondent authorities to produce the video recording of the physical test and marks obtained by the petitioner in the selection process conducted by the Central Selection Board of Constable under Advertisement No. 01/2023.
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that despite having all the requisite qualification and doing well in written and physical examination; as also she was accorded gate pass to verify the requisite documents, she has not been selected in an
Patna High Court CWJC No.10334 of 2025(2) dt.08-07-2025 2/3 arbitrary manner. The aforesaid facts has also been brought on record by filing a representation before all the authorities concerned, but no action has been taken, hence the present writ petition.
4. Mr. Sanjay Pandey, learned Advocate for the Central Selection Board of Constable, on instruction, informed this Court that from the materials available on record, it is evident that the petitioner was the resident of Uttar Pradesh and therefore, in terms of clause 16(viii) of Advertisement No. 01 of 2023, she could not have been allowed the benefit of reservation; nonetheless, she had submitted her application under the E.B.C. category. The aforesaid clause further stipulates that in case any person, who is the resident of different State, he/she should file requisite application under the unreserved category. In case of claiming reservation by filing his/her application in reserved category, in such circumstances, his/her application shall be automatically cancelled.
5. In the case in hand, since the petitioner has filed her application under the reserved category, despite the fact she is the resident of Uttar Pradesh and, as such, her candidature came to be cancelled on account of category mismatch.
6. Considering the submissions set forth by learned
Patna High Court CWJC No.10334 of 2025(2) dt.08-07-2025 3/3 Advocate for the parties and taking note of the fact that on account of category mismatch, her candidature came to be rejected in terms with clause 16(viii) of the subjected advertisement, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the present writ petition.
7. Accordingly, the same stands dismissed.
(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U