SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Pat) 762

RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
Lalita Kumari – Appellant
Versus
Bihar State University Service Commission – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: M/s Purushottam Kumar Jha (in 15313); Abhinav Srivastava (in 15314).
For the Respondent: M/s Pawan Kumar Choudhary (in both).

Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J. – These two writ applications are raising a common question for consideration, therefore, on the request of the parties, both the writ applications have been taken up together for consideration and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. For sake of clarity, this Court would briefly refer the facts of both the cases separately hereunder: –

CWJC No.15313 of 2022

3. In this case, the petitioner has questioned the Notice No. B.S.U.S.C./foKkñ&14/2022-1240 dated 13.10.2022 (Annexure ‘3’) and Notice No. B.S.U.S.C/foKkñ&14/2022-( [k.M&5)-1298 dated 22.10.2022 (Annexure ‘5’) to the writ application whereby the petitioner has been held ineligible for the post of Assistant Professor, Hindi (under EBC category) on the ground that the petitioner had paid Rs.75/- as fee but she does not come under clause 10.1(ii), 10.1(iii) or 10.1(iv) of the advertisement published by the Bihar State University Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commission’) vide Annexure ‘1’ to the writ application. The petitioner further prays that upon setting aside the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top