Jitendra Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9964 of 2016 ====================================================== 1.
Jitendra Kumar son of Jagdish Singh, Resident of Village- Kasiouna, P.SRaj Nagar, Distr- Madhubani. 2.
Kishor Kumar Purve Son of Tarini Purve, Resident of Village- Madhuban Uda, Kishunganj, Dist- Madhepura.
3.
Nilesh Kumar Mishra, son of Late Manohar Mishra, Resident of VillageShirnia, P.S- Bogri, Jamalpur, Dist- Khagaria. 4.
Saurabh Suman son of Niranjan Prasad Singh, Resident of Ward No. 14, Chitragupta Nagar, P.S.- Town Thana Khagaria, Dist- Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
The Principal Secretary, Science and Technology, Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Additional Secretary, Science and Technology, Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4.
The Principal Secretary Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 5.
The Bihar Public Service Commission, through the Secretary 15th Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Patna.
6.
The Joint Secretary Cum Examination Controller, Bihar Public Service Commission 15th Jawahar Lal Ne 7.
The Examination Controller, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15th, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Jyoti Ranjan Jha For the State :
Mr. S. D. Yadav, AAG 9 For the BPSC :
Mr. Sanjay Pandey Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-04-2024
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.
2. The matter relates to appointment of Assistant Professors in Engineering/Polytechnic Colleges of Bihar, pursuant to the advertisement published in the year 2014.
Patna High Court CWJC No.9964 of 2016(3) dt.25-04-2024 2/3
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that there was some defects in the model answer key, which needed to be rectified. The petitioners submitted their objections also, but the same were not considered by the Bihar Public Service Commission.
4. Learned Counsel for the Bihar Public Service Commission submits that after consideration of the objections submitted by the petitioners and other candidates and upon report of the expert committee, the Commission evaluated the answer sheets of the candidates (objective type examination), pursuant to the Advertisement Nos. 22 and 23 of 2014 and subsequently the result of objective type examination was published on 20.04.2016, in which the petitioners were not found successful. The appointment on the advertised posts have been completed around 2016-17.
5. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned and taking into consideration the fact that the selection process has, now, been completed and the specific stand of the Bihar Public Service Commission is that after opinion of the expert committee, the answer sheets of the candidates were evaluated and the petitioners were not
Patna High Court CWJC No.9964 of 2016(3) dt.25-04-2024 3/3 found successful in the said examination, accordingly, in my opinion, the claim of the petitioners is devoid of any merit.
6. This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √