Vivek Pandey vs State of Bihar - 2022 Supreme(Pat) 895

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Pat) 895

MADHURESH PRASAD
Vivek Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Petitioners: M/s Niranjan Kumar, Gaurav Bihari (in 11556).
For the Resp.-BPSC : M/s Lalit Kishore, Sr. Adv., Sanjay Pandey (in 11556).
For the State : Mr. Prashant Pratap (in 11556).
For the Petitioner: M/s Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Adv., Kumar Nikhil (in 16181).
For the Resp.-BPSC : M/s Lalit Kishore, Sr. Adv., Sanjay Pandey (in 16181).
For the State : Mr.Md. Nadim Seraj (in 16181).

Madhuresh Prasad, J. – Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. Mrigank Mauli in CWJC No. 16181 of 2021. Mr. Niranjan Kumar, learned counsel has appeared for the petitioners in CWJC No. 11556 of 2021. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Lalit Kishore has appeared on behalf of the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) along with Mr. Sanjay Pandey, learned Advocate. The State is represented by Mr. Prashant Pratap, learned GP-2 in CWJC No. 11556 of 2021 and Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned SC-11 in CWJC No. 16181 of 2021.

2. In CWJC No. 11556 of 2021, petitioners seek quashing of result of the preliminary test dated 27.04.2021 published in the process of appointment of Assistant Prosecution Officer (APO), pursuant to Advertisement No. 01/2020. The result has been declared by the BPSC, Patna. The writ petition has been filed raising a grievance that only 3995 candidates have been declared successful in the preliminary test.

3. It is submitted that result should have been published in the ratio of 1:10 of total advertised seats, which has not been done. Petitioners, therefore, have prayed for directing the respondents to issue a fresh result of preliminary test as per ratio 1:10 laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Co