JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties.

The petitioners in the present writ application have prayed for following reliefs:

“i. Respondent no.03 be directed to delete/expunge the star mark given against the names of petitioners and further wrongly observed that their result shall be given effect after disposal of economic offence PS Case No.6/2024.

ii. Writ of Mandamus be issued against the respondents to take further action in respect of their joining on the post of primary teacher in government elementary schools and further to grant consequential benefits to the petitioners.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, being fully qualified and eligible candidates, had applied pursuant to Advertisement No. 22/2024 dated 07.02.2024 issued by the Bihar Public Service Commission for appointment of teachers in Elementary and Middle Schools. It is urged that the petitioners participated in the selection process and appeared in the written examination conducted by the Commission. Although an Economic Offence P.S. Case No. 06/2024 came to be instituted wherein the petitioners were named, it is pointed out that the petitioners were granted bail by the learned ACJM, Patna on 02.04.2024, there being no substantive evidence indicating any wrongdoing on their part.

3. It is the specific case of the petitioners that thereafter they were issued admit cards and duly appeared in the examinations held on 19.07.2024 and 20.07.2024. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners performed meritoriously and secured marks above the prescribed cut-off, which fact stands admitted from the OMR answer sheets issued by the respondent authorities themselves. It is further contended that the Commission, having conducted the examination afresh, declared the results wherein the petitioners were shown as successful candidates.

However, learned counsel submits that in a wholly arbitrary manner and with a biased approach, the respondent Commission has affixed a “star mark” against the names of the petitioners and withheld the effect of their result under the pretext of pendency of the aforesaid criminal case. It is argued that such an action is dehors the statutory provisions and amounts to placing the result in a sealed cover without any authority of law. According to learned counsel, the pendency of a criminal case, particularly one unconnected with the examination process, cannot be a valid ground to deny or defer appointment to a candidate who has otherwise succeeded on merit.

4. It is further submitted that the adverse remark made in the result dated 15.11.2024 is per se illegal, arbitrary, and unsustainable in the eyes of law. Learned counsel emphasizes that criminal proceedings, by their very nature, take considerable time to conclude, and if such a ground is permitted to stall appointments, it would lead to grave injustice and irreparable harm to deserving candidates. The petitioners, having successfully cleared the examination on their own merit, cannot be made to suffer on account of an unproven allegation.

5. Learned counsel also contends that the action of the respondents in withholding the appointment of the petitioners amounts to violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India, as similarly situated candidates have not been subjected to such discriminatory treatment. It is thus submitted that the impugned action reflects malafide intent and is liable to be set aside.

6. Per Contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, namely the Bihar Public Service Commission, submits at the outset that the instant writ petition is misconceived and has been filed seeking, inter alia, a direction for expunging the “star mark” indicated against the names of the petitioners in the result dated 15.11.2024 and for issuance of appointment letters on the basis of their purported success in the examination. It is contended that the said marking merely reflects an administrative