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

2025 Supreme(Pat) 345

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HARISH KUMAR, J.
Sudhir Kumar Gupta S/o Rajkumar Gupta - Appellant 
Versus 
The State of Bihar - Respondent 
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3435 of 2022, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4769 of 2022
Decided on : 25-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate, Ms. Ritika Rani, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, Mr. P. K. Shahi, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Kunal Tiwary, Advocate, Mr. Aniket Singh, Advocate
Ashok Kumar And Anr. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., reported in (2017) 4 SCC 357

The selection process for recruitment must comply strictly with the criteria published in the advertisement; changes are impermissible unless explicitly allowed.

Headnote:(A) Bihar Police Subordinate Service Commission Act, 2016 - Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India - Challenge to selection process of Police Sub-Inspector posts - Petitioners alleged irregularities in the selection process and arbitrary reduction of cut off marks - Petitioners scored above cut off but were excluded from final merit list. (Paras 2-4, 10-11, 28)

(B) Transparency in selection process - The right to information must be upheld to ensure fairness - Petitioners failed to demonstrate any illegality in the process as they accepted the terms while applying. (Paras 22-24)

(C) Legal principle established - Recruitment processes must adhere strictly to advertised criteria; changes are impermissible unless clearly stated. (Paras 25-26)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged the selection process for Police Sub-Inspector posts under Advertisement No. 1/2019, alleging procedural irregularities and the arbitrary setting of cut-off marks resulting in their exclusion despite scoring above prescribed thresholds.

Findings of Court:
The Court upheld the Commission's process, stating that petitions lacked substantiation of irregularities and the reduction in cut-off marks was justified under the circumstances.

Issues: The primary issues were whether the selection process was conducted fairly and in accordance with the rules, and whether the cut-off marks were reduced arbitrarily.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court affirmed that candidates cannot challenge the selection process after participating and that any changes in terms must be announced upfront.

Result: Writ petitions dismissed; parties to bear their own costs.

Table of Content
1. emphasis on 'right to know' in public examination processes. (Para 1 , 12)
2. challenge to the selection process. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
3. arguments about selection irregularities. (Para 5 , 6 , 10)
4. right to information and transparency. (Para 7 , 9)
5. validity of cut-off mark changes. (Para 8 , 18 , 30)
6. legal principles on challenging examination results. (Para 21 , 22 , 24)
7. affirmation of proper selection process. (Para 26 , 27 , 33)
8. final ruling on petitions based on merit list findings. (Para 28)
9. final ruling of the court. (Para 34 , 35 , 36)

JUDGMENT :

HARISH KUMAR, J.

The Cluster of the petitioners in both the cases are represented through Mr. Dinu Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioners with M/s Ritika Rani, learned Advocate. The Bihar Police Sub-ordinate Service Commission is represented through Mr. P. K. Shahi, learned Senior Advocate. Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, learned SC-8 appears on behalf of the State.

2. The entire selection process as well as appointment of the selected candidates against Advertisement No. 1/2019 is put to challenge in the premise of the same being suffered from the vice of serious irregularities. The petitioners sought a direction upon the concerned respondents to produce question booklet, OMR sheet and answer key pertaining to Preliminary and Mains examination conducted in relation to Advertisement No. 1/2019. The petitioners are aggrieved with the merit list of Bihar Police Sub-Inspector published on 17.06.2021, as contained in Annexure-9 Series against the advertisement No. 1/2019 for the Post of Police Sub-Inspector, Sergeant, Assistant Superintendent Jail (Direct Recruitment), Assistant Superintendent Jail (Ex-Servicemen) conducted by the Bihar Police Sub-ordinate Service Commission as well as consequential appointment letters, as contained in Annexures- 12, 13 and 14 of the writ petition, as the same are prepared and issued in complete defiance of the prescription of the Advertisement as well as the concerned Rules; Moreover, the cut off mark of 75.8% under the General Category has been reduced to 75% in a most arbitrary manner after ousting the meritorious candidates and thereby violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

3. Besides the aforenoted reliefs, the petitioners also sought a declaration from this Court to hold that the entire process of selection and appointment against Advertisement No. 1/2019 is in complete disregard of the terms and conditions incorporated in the Advertisement. Apart from the process of selection being nontransparent and unreasonable to extend favour to undeserving persons and thereby misused the office. The petitioners in substance sought a direction upon the respondents to disclose the reason for not declaring the petitioners successful despite scoring more than the cut off marks in mains written examination and further to declare the petitioners successful for the post advertised and appoint them as per their merit position and to extend all consequential service benefits.

4. To adjudicate the claim of the petitioners, necessary facts, as culled out from the materials available on record, are as follows:

(i) To facilitate the selection of the candidates to the post of Group ‘C’ of the Home (Police) Department and posts of other Department under the State Government of Bihar, the Government of Bihar constituted Bihar Police Sub-Ordinate Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commission’) under the Bihar Police Sub-Ordinate Service Commission, Act , 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 2016’). In terms of the Act, 2016, the Commission is empowered to select the candidates for appointment to the cadre post enumerated in the appended schedule according to the prescribed procedure under the Service Cadre Rules of respective posts/departments. As per Sub-Clause 2 of Sub- Section 9 of the Act, 2016, it was specifically provided that the Commission may hold a Combined Competitive Examination for the post with sim

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 Back to top