IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.208 of 2020

Arising out of

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22444 of 2019

======================================================

Bhairo Yadav @ Bhairav Yadav, aged about 28 years, Male Son of Jharu

Mahto, resident of Village- Bishunpur, P.S. - Chandan, District- Banka.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Home and

Appointment, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Banka.

3.

The Officer on-duty-cum-officer-in-charge District General Branch, Banka.

4.

The Circle Officer, Chandan, District- Banka.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s

:

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate with

Mr. Shyam Sunder Pandey, Advocate

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ghosarvey, AC to AAG 3

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH)

Date : 24-01-2023

Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

appellant and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ghosarvey, learned AC to AAG 3

for the State.

2. The appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated

21.01.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No.

22444 of 2019 has preferred the present appeal by which the writ

petition filed by him for being appointed on the post of Choukidar

in place of his father has been dismissed.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.208 of 2020 dt.24-01-2023

2/4

3. The only point for consideration before the Court was

as to whether the appellant fulfills the minimum criteria for being

appointed to the post i.e., whether he had passed the Class-10

examination.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that at the

time of application, he had given the Madhyama certificate of

Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar dated 27.03.2015 but the same has been

found to be unacceptable for the reason that the State Government

has de-recognized such qualification with effect from 26.06.2014.

However, learned counsel pointed out that one similarly situated

person namely Pandu Turi in the District of Banka, who had

passed Parveshika examination on 16.09.2014, from the same

institution has been appointed on the post of Choukidar/ Dafadar

as is claimed by the appellant.

5. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the

appellant at the time of applying had submitted Madhyama

certificate which is equivalent to 10^th from Hindi Vidyapith,

Deoghar but the same was after the date on which the degree has

been derecognised by the State Government, hence it cannot be

accepted for employment in the State of Bihar.

6. Having considered the rival contentions, the Court

does not find any reason and occasion to interfere. Paragraph 9 of

Patna High Court L.P.A No.208 of 2020 dt.24-01-2023

3/4

the writ petition itself is an admission that the appellant had

submitted his Madhyama examination certificate dated 27.03.2015

which according to him is as per the requirement. In view of the

admitted position that certificate issued by the Hindi Vidyapith,

Deoghar has not been recognized by the State of Bihar for the

purposes of employment, the cut-off date being 26.06.2014, the

certificate of Madhyama produced by the appellant before the

authorities for consideration for appointment to the post of

Choukidar, not being accepted, cannot be said to be illegal or

arbitrary. Rightly, the eligibility criteria has been applied in the

case of the appellant, that too, based on his own admission, as

would be clear from the aforesaid statement made at paragraph 9

of the writ petition.

7. Coming to the contention of learned counsel for the

appellant that Pandu Turi being similarly situated has been

appointed on the said post, the Court would only observe that right

to equality does not have a negative connotation