Jitendra Singh v. The Home Secretary Through The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9702 of 2017 =========================================================== Jitendra Singh (Advocate), son of late Chandranath Singh, resident of Village+PostFarna, P.S.-Barhara, District-Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Home Secretary through the Union of India, New Delhi.

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

3. Registrar General, Patna High Court, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent No.1: Mrs. Nivedita Nivrikar, CGC For the Respondent No.2: Mr.Gopal Krishna, AC to GA-7 For the Respondent No.3: Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Adv. Mr.Samir Kumar, Adv.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 31-08-2017 None for the petitioner on call.

Learned counsel for the Patna High Court is present and the order passed by a Division Bench in identical matter and relief which was C.W.J.C. No.15783 of 2014 has been produced. The Division Bench vide order dated 08.09.2015 had already rejected such prayer for the reasons specially indicated in paragraph 9, which reads as under:- "We do not find any reasonable ground for issuance of any writ in the nature of writ of a mandamus to the High Court on its administrative side to the effect that the question papers of the competitive examination, held for the appointment to the posts of Superior Judicial

Patna High Court CWJC No.9702 of 2017 dt.31-08-2017 Service, in the State of Bihar, should be printed in Hindi also. The use of English language in the question papers, for selection to the post of Superior Judicial Service, is a policy matter of the High Court on its administrative side, which cannot be said to be irrational and arbitrary, in background of constitutional provisions, as noted above, warranting interference in exercise of power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, we do not find any merit in this application. This application is, accordingly, dismissed."

Even the present writ application, therefore, is required to be dismissed for the same set of reasons.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Arvind/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 04.09.2017 Transmission Date