IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.491 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4890 of 2020 ======================================================

1. The Chairman, Bihar Staff Selection Commission P.O. Veterinary College Patna - 14.

2. The Bihar Staff Selection Commission, P.O. Veterinary College, Patna - 14 through the Secretary.

3. The Secretary Bihar Staff Selection Commission, P.O. Veterinary College, Patna- 14.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. Vinay Kumar Son of Ramshankar Singh, resident of village- Rajkhand, P.S-

Aurai, District - Muzaffarpur.

2. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Aastha Prakash, Adv.

Ms. Kanupriya, Adv.

Mr. Abhishek Anand, Adv.

For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ghosarvey, AC to AAG 3 For the Pvt. Respondent : Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Adv.

Mr. Abhinav Shandilya, Adv.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 18-02-2026 This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellants Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna and its authorities (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commission’)

challenging the order dated 01.05.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 4890 of 2020. Prayer of the petitioner in the writ petition was for a direction to the respondent authorities to include his name in the list of selected candidates at the appropriate place which was published by the respondent Commission vide Memo No. 2478/Aa dated 27.09.2019; and also permit the petitioner to participate in the driving test and interview on the ground that the petitioner had passed the written examination and has experience of driving of more than seven years in the Circle Office, Aurai, District Muzaffarpur for which the petitioner had submitted his experience certificate duly issued by the Circle Officer in the prescribed format in the office of the Commission.

2. In the counter affidavit filed by the Commission-

respondent Nos. 4 and 5, it is stated that the allocation of marks has been prescribed in the following manner:- the written test carries 75 marks and against the work experience of the duly contractual Niyojit Vehicle Driver in the offices of Bihar Government, total 25 marks, with the clear stipulation that for driving experience of each year, five marks is to be given upto maximum 25. It is further stated that the petitioner, Vinay Kumar, who comes under Unreserved category, appeared in the written test and obtained 44.75 marks, which is of course above the minimum qualifying marks of 40% fixed for General Category candidates. However, the petitioner was working as daily wage driver in the Circle Office, Aurai and the certificate issued by the Circle Office does not entitle him to get marks under the heading of Driving Experience as the work experience of the petitioner does not fall under the category of Niyojit Vehicle Driver of the Government of Bihar. Therefore, the marks under the heading of ‘driving experience’ has not been awarded to the petitioner and since the petitioner could not secure the minimum qualifying marks of 55 for being called to the driving test and interview, therefore his name did not find place in the list of eligible candidates who have been called for driving test.

The learned Single Judge in the impugned order has been pleased to hold as follows:

“6. In the light of the submission made by the parties, it transpires to this Court that at the time of drafting of the said advertisement, the authority particularly the Secretary and other officials must be taken into consideration that this advertisement has come in the light of Hon’ble Court’s order, therefore, the