Patna High Court
Khushboo Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 5 February, 2025
Author: P. B. Bajanthri
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri, Sunil Dutta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.417 of 2021
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16836 of 2018
======================================================
Khushboo Kumari D/o Shiv Shankar Prasad Resident of Village/Mohalla-
Govindpur Bihar P.S.- Mansoorchak Distt- Begusarai.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Bihar,
Patna.
2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.
3. Central Selection Board of Constable through its Chairman, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Chairman, Central Selection Board of Constable, Bihar, Patna.
5. The Secretary, Central Selection Board of Constable, Bihar, Patna.
6. The Commandant, Bihar Military Police, Patna.
7. The Special Work Officer, Central Selection Board Police Recruitment
Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar-1, Advocate.
: Mr. Jay Prakash Sharma, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, AC to AAG-3.
For the CSBS : Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Advocate.
: Mr. Binod Kumar Mishra, Advocate.
: Mr. Vivek Anand Amritesh, Advocate.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)
Date : 05-02-2025
Appellant - Khushboo Kumari is a resident of
Village/Mohalla- Govindpur, Bihar, P.S. Mansoorchak, District
Begusarai. She is a candidate for recruitment to the post of
Constable pursuant to advertisement no.01 of 2017. Her claim
was under E.B.C. category, and the application for the post is
required to be filled through online. While submitting online
Patna High Court L.P.A No.417 of 2021 dt.05-02-2025
2/7
application she had committed error to the extent of claiming
that she is a B.C. candidate instead of E.B.C. On this score her
candidature has been rejected to the extent that her certificate is
of E.B.C. whereas her application reveals B.C. category. Feeling
aggrieved by the decision of the concerned respondent, she has
invoked writ jurisdiction by filing C.W.J.C. No.16836 of 2018.
It was decided against her on 05.04.2021 while affirming the
decision of the selecting authority to the extent of non-suitable
to the post of Constable. Feeling aggrieved by the order of
learned Single Judge dated 05.04.2021, appellant has presented
the present L.P.A.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
appellant is from a rural background and application for the post
of Constable is required to be submitted through online
(technology). While filling up of application, there is an error
committed by her insofar as not indicating that her claim is
under E.B.C. category, on the other hand she has stated that she
is claiming under B.C. category. On this trivial issue selecting
authority has rejected her candidature and it has been affirmed
by the learned Single Judge. It is also submitted that learned
Single Judge has taken note of instruction to the candidates and
Hon'ble Division Bench decision of this Court. He is relying on
Patna High Court L.P.A No.417 of 2021 dt.05-02-2025
3/7
Supreme Court decision in the case of State of West Bengal &
Ors. vs. Mitul Kumar Jana reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC)
714, in this case candidate has suppressed material information
relating to pendency of criminal proceedings. Hon'ble Supreme
Court has taken note of the alleged offence to the extent that
candidate was not involved in a heinous/serious offence or any
offence involving moral turpitude. There also candidate has not
adhered to the candidates instruction in not filling relevant
column in respect of whether was he involved in criminal case
or not. It is also submitted that the appellant's case is on better
footing than Mitul Kumar Jana. In the present case what is error
is only a mistake committed by the appellant insofar as filling
up of a category as a B.C. instead of E.B.C.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent
Mr. Sanjay Pandey vehemently argued that once the candidate
violated the instruction in such an event such candidate is not
entitle to consider his/her name for the post. It is submitted that
there is no infirmity in the Selecting Authority's decision read
with the order of learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge
has taken note of decisions of Division Bench in the case of
Anil Kumar vs. the State of Bihar and others, reported in
2013 (4) PLJR 1 and in the case of Central Selection Board of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.417 of 2021 dt.05-02-2025
4/7
Constable and others vs. Raj Kumar and others, reported in
2017 (1) PLJR 599. It is also submitted that matter is required
to be referred to Larger Bench if the Division Bench decision is
not taken into consideration by this Bench. Learned counsel for
the respondent is relying on the Co-ordinate Bench decision in
the case of The Chairman, Bihar Police Subordinate Services
Commission & Anr. vs. Dolly Kumari & Ors. decided on
15.05.2023
in L.P.A. No.46 of 2022 and the decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
vs. Ajay Kumar Sharma & Anr., reported in (2016) 15 SCC
289 and in the case of Mary Pushpam vs. Telvi Curusumary
& Ors., reported in (2024) 1 SCR 11.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties. Undisputed facts are that appellant - Khushboo Kumari
is from a village and she is new to the technology insofar as
filling online application for the post of Constable. There is no
serious error committed by her insofar as filling up of category
as B.C. instead of E.B.C. It is a trivial issue, therefore, the
concerned authority should have considered her candidature
after accepting the category as E.B.C. On this issue the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya vs. Delhi
Subordinate Services Selection Board and Anr., reported in
Patna High Court L.P.A No.417 of 2021 dt.05-02-2025
(2016) 4 SCC 754 (para 14 to 18), it is held that belatedly
submission of OBC certificate could be entertained and in yet
another case viz., Vashist Narayan Kumar vs. State of Bihar
and Ors. reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2, in paragraph
nos.3 & 20 it is held as under:-
"3. The appellant submitted his educational
certificates/ mark sheet as well as hi caste
certificate for document verification. On
11.06.2018, the final results reflected him as
having failed. The only reason was that, while in
the application form uploaded online, his date of
birth was shown as 08.12.1997, in the school mark
sheet, his date of birth was reflected as 18.12.1997.
20. In this case, the appellant has
participated in the selection process and cleared
all the stages successfully. The error in the
application is trivial which did not play any part in
the selection process. The State was not justified in
making a mountain out of this molehill. Perhaps
the rarefied atmosphere of the cybercafe, got the
better of the appellant. He omitted to notice the
error and even failed to avail the corrective
mechanism offered. In the instant case, we cannot
turn a Nelson's eye to the ground realities that
existed. In the order dated 22.11.2021 in C.A.
No.6983 of 2021 (Prince Jaibir Singh v. Union of
India), this Court rightly observed that though
technology is a great enabler, there is a at the same
time, a digital divide."
5. In view of later decision cited supra the decision
cited on behalf of the respondents is not assisting the
respondents. In fact in the case of Mitul Kumar Jana (supra) the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.417 of 2021 dt.05-02-2025
Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken in respect of suppression of
material information where the relief has been granted to Mitul
Kumar Jana with an observation that Mitul Kumar Jana is not
involved in a heinous/ serious offence or any offence involving
moral turpitude and the fact that in the said criminal case he has
been honourably acquitted. Therefore, the present case of
appellant - Khushboo Kumari is on better footing than Mitul
Kumar Jana case, accordingly, the order of learned Single Judge
dated 05.04.2021 passed in C.W.J.C. No.16836 of 2018 read
with impugned decision in C.W.J.C. No.16836 of 2018 are set-
aside.
6. The learned counsel for respondent submitted
that Co-ordinate Bench decision is binding on this Bench, if this
Bench is not considering in that event matter is to be referred to
larger Bench. The principle is not attracted for the reasons that
we are relying on the latest Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision
viz., Vashist Narayan Kumar. State of Uttar Pradesh decision
cited supra. Citations and principles argued by respondents do
not assist their case and it is in different context and factual
aspects are not one and the same. Similarly Mary Pushpam case
is also not assisting, in view of the fact that we are relying on
Vashist Narayan Kumar's case, facts are identical insofar as
Patna High Court L.P.A No.417 of 2021 dt.05-02-2025
trivial issue of inadvertently filling wrong material in a column
i.e., B.C. instead of E.B.C.
7. The concerned authority is hereby directed to re-
consider the claim of appellant - Khushboo Kumari for the
selection and appointment to the post of Constable within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. If
the appellant - Khushboo Kumari is appointed as a Constable, it
is made clear that she is not entitle for arrears of salary,
however, she is entitle to seniority and other benefits on par with
such other persons appointed pursuant to advertisement i.e.,
from their appointed date. The same shall be taken note of by
the selecting and appointing authority and proceed to pass
speaking order and communicate the same to the appellant
within the time limit stipulated supra.
8. Accordingly, present L.P.A. is allowed.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
ritik/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 25.02.2025
Transmission Date NA
