Patna High Court
Vikash Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 22 July, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10905 of 2025
======================================================
1. Vikash Kumar Son of Jairam Bhakt, resident of ward no. 7, Kerma, P.S.-
Kudhni, District- Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
2. Manglesh Kumar, Son of - Brijnandan Ray, Resident of Basauli, Post-
Basauli, P.S.- Turki, District- Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
3. Ranjeet Kumar, Son of Suresh Hazra, Resident of- Ward No.- 5, Majhauliya,
P.S.- Majhauliya, West Champaran Bihar.
4. Ghanshyam Prashad Chaurashiya, Son of - Krishdev Prashad Chaurashiya,
Resident of- Ward no. 21, Sathbirwa, P.S.-Majhauliya, District- West
Champaran, Bihar.
5. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Son of Kashi Sharma, Resident of - Durga Nagar, Bus
Stand, Bettiah, P.S.- Mufassil, District- West Champaran, Bihar.
6. Sudhir Kumar, resident of - Sant Ghat, Babu Colony, Bettiah, P.S. Bettiah
Town, District- West Champaran, Bihar.
7. Ranjit Kumar, Son of Gopal Raut, resident of - Modipurbhatttola,
Chailabhar, District- West Champaran, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, General Administration
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Chairman Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna, Bihar.
3. The Commissioner, Tirhut Range, West Champaran.
4. The District Magistrate Cum Collector Bettiah, West Champaran.
5. The Deputy Collector Establishment, Bettiah West Champaran Collectriate,
West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rishabh Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anwar Karim, AC to GP-10
For the BSSC : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Rai, BSSC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-07-2025
Learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned
Counsel for the Bihar Staff Selection Commission and learned
Patna High Court CWJC No.10905 of 2025 dt.22-07-2025
2/5
Counsel for the State are present.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with
the following reliefs:-
"I. To Quash the order dated
15/01/2025
issued with panel list by
Secretary Bihar Staff Selection Committee
which is issued without following the Due
process of law and is legal and violative to
Articles 14, 16 and 21 to the constitution of
India and is not in conformity of Hon’ble
Supreme Court’s Judgment in the Renu and
others v District and Session Judge, Tis
Hazari Courts, Delhi and another reported
in (2014)14 SCC 50 and Hon’ble High Court
Judgment Passed in CWJC 18612/2019
dated 18/12/2019 as the appointment being
made is illegal and De-horse the law, also by
calling entire records quash the same along
with its effect and operations.
II. To direct the Respondents
to make fill up the Posts as per Judgment
Renu and others v District and Session
Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and another
reported in (2014) 14 SCC 50 and Hon’ble
High Court Judgment Passed in CWJC
18612/2019 dated 18/12/2019.
III. To hold that the
respondents are under an obligation to fill
up the entire vacancies of Bettiah district
Patna High Court CWJC No.10905 of 2025 dt.22-07-2025
3/5
with due Process by following the Judgment
of Hon’ble High court as the Respondents
have not disclosed the number of vacancies.
IV. To direct the respondents
to fill the entire vacancies of Bettiah West
Champaran by releasing fresh advertisement
by disclosing the number of vacancies to be
filled up, without disclosing the number of
posts is illegal and against the law.
V. Any other reliefs or relief
as deemed fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the petitioners’ case or to
mold the relief as the facts highlighted in the
body of the petition.”
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits
that the petitioners have appeared in the examination process
conducted by the Bihar Staff Selection Commission, but could
not be competed. After publication of the result, Counsel raised
the point that total number of proper vacancy has not been
published in the advertisement and it is due to this reason
Counsel filed the present writ petition. In the writ petition
prayer for quashing the order dated 15.01.2025 contained the
panel list issued by the Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection
Commission has been made.
4. Learned Counsel for the Commission submits
that the Bihar Staff Selection Commission has conducted the
Patna High Court CWJC No.10905 of 2025 dt.22-07-2025
4/5
exam for the post of Parichari/Parichari (Bishisht) in compliance
of the Hon’ble Court’s order passed in CWJC No.18612 of
2019, CWJC No.17070 of 2019, CWJC No.18148 of 2019 and
CWJC No.18443 of 2019. Counsel submits that by those
decisions made by this Hon’ble Court, opportunity has been
granted to the petitioners and other similarly situated persons to
appear in the said examination as a one time measure. Under
different advertisements, in different years, the candidates
having 8th pass and candidates having 10th pass, both were
eligible to appear for appointment on Class-IV post in the
respective years. It is due to this reason, two types of exam had
been conducted. In one type of exam eligibility was fixed 8th
pass and another type of exam eligibility was fixed 10 th pass.
Counsel for the Bihar Staff Selection Commission further
submits that after publication of the said result on 8 th basis and
10th basis, the petitioners could not be found selected and only
thereafter he filed the present writ petition submitting that the
published result should be quashed.
5. Learned Counsel for the State submits that in
the light of the discrepancies made in the various districts for
the appointment of Class-IV posts/Group-D posts as Peon/Peon
(Specific), a separate Rule has been published in the year 2023
Patna High Court CWJC No.10905 of 2025 dt.22-07-2025
5/5
in the light of this Hon’ble Court’s order under which the
process of appointment has been made in which petitioners were
not selected and thereafter petitioners have come with this plea
that total number of posts were not advertised.
6. In the light of the averments made, it
transpires to this Court that petitioners appeared in the selection
process and upon declaration of the result in which they were
not successful, filed the present writ petition.
7. This Court is of the firm view that petitioners
have no case, particularly when they have appeared in the
examination process and not selected. Accordingly, the writ
petition stands dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Mkr./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 23.07.2025 Transmission Date
