← Library
Patna High CourtL.P.A/798/2019rejected

Prakash Chandra v. The State Of Bihar

2019-07-11The Chief Justice-,Justice Smt. Anjana Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.798 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6030 of 2019 ====================================================== Prakash Chandra (Male), aged about 38 years, Son of Late Upendra Prasad Singh Resident of Main Road, Ward No. 42, Balbhadarpur, Belwaganj, P.S.- Laheriasaria, Darbhanga- 846001 (Bihar).

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

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

4.

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

5.

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

6.

The Controller of Examination Bihar Public Service Commission, 15 Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna- 800001. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Kumar Kaushik, Advocate For the B.P.S.C.

:

Mr. Lalit Kishore, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Advocate Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Prabhat Kumar Verma (AAG-3) Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, A.C. to AAG-3.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 11-07-2019 Heard Shri Kumar Kaushik at length who has tried to persuade us to re-visit the decision taken by the Expert Body with regard to the questions which he says do not reflect the correct key answers and has caused prejudice to the appellant.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.798 of 2019(2) dt.11-07-2019 2/2 From the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge, we find that the learned Single Judge has taken every care to look into every aspect of the matter and, therefore, having done so it will not be appropriate for this Court in appeal to review the said judgment which is based on an objective consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner-appellant.

We find no merit in the appeal. The same is accordingly rejected.

(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ) (Anjana Mishra, J) P.K.P./- U