JUDGMENT

1. The instant case has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID 19 Pandemic, requiring social distancing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for directing the respondents to declare the petitioner as a successful candidate in the Mains (written) examination in connection with Advertisement no. 42 of 2011 on the ground that though he has secured 498 marks, three other candidates having lesser marks have been declared successful whereafter, they have been called for interview and have also been finally selected as against the post of Assistant Prosecution Officer.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a law graduate and is a practicing Advocate at the Civil Court, Hajipur. An advertisement no. 42 of 2011 was published by the B.P.S.C. on 19.10.2011 for making appointment on a total number of 80 posts of Assistant Prosecution Officer. The petitioner is stated to be belonging to the backward class category and as far as the backward class category is concerned, 10 posts had been earmarked for the said category and two posts had been assigned for the backward class ladies category. The petitioner is stated to have applied for the post of Assistant Prosecution Officer under the backward class category, whereafter the Admit card was issued to him and then the Preliminary competitive examination was held on 23.03.2019, in which the petitioner had qualified. The petitioner had appeared in the mains (written) examination, which was held in between 02.02.2015 to 06.02.2015 and is stated to have performed very well. However, when the result of the Assistant Prosecution Officer, Mains (Written) competitive examination was published by the competent authority of the respondent Commission on 07.04.2017, the petitioner did not find his name amongst the list of successful candidates, though he had secured 498 marks.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Annexure-8 to the writ petition is the list of candidates finally selected under the backward class category, from which it is apparent that three candidates namely Puja Bharti, Jai Prakash Verma and Priyanka Kumari, though have got lesser marks than the petitioner in the Mains (written)competitive examination, however, the petitioner has been illegally not considered successful in the main (written) examination despite having obtained 498 marks i.e. more than the marks obtained by the said three candidates, hence, the respondents are required to be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Assistant Prosecution Officer.

5. Per contra, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Bihar Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as "the Commission"), Shri PN. Shahi, assisted by Shri Sanjay Pandey, Advocate, has submitted that an advertisement bearing Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 was published by the respondent Commission on 19.10.2011, pursuant to the requisition letter no. 10457 dated 27.12.2010 of the Home Department, Government of Bihar. The last date of submission of form was fixed as 17.11.2011. The learned Senior counsel for the respondent Commission, without going into the details of the case has directly sought to address the issue involved in the present case and has submitted that the petitioner could not be declared successful in the written examination because he had secured 498 marks, which is less than the cut-off marks i.e. 503, fixed for his reservation category i.e. the backward class category(05), hence he was not called for interview and this fact would be apparent from Annexure-5 to the writ petition, which clearly mentions the cut-off marks for the backward class category to be 503, as far as the Maims (written) examination is concerned. The learned counsel for the respondent Commission has further submitted that the final result was published on 14.6.2017, after the interview was con