Patna High Court
Amitabh vs The State Of Bihar on 14 October, 2025
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.486 of 2024
======================================================
Amitabh, Son of Nawal Kishore Kapri, Resident of Village- Baridariyapur,
P.S. and P.O. Jamalpur, District - Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Additional Chief Secretary, Education
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Nehru Path Bailey Road,
Patna.
4. The Joint Secretary cum Examination Controller TRE I, Bihar Public
Service Commission, Nehru Path Bailey Road, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate
Mrs. Ritika Rani, Advocate
Ms. Kanika, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Dr. Mankeshwar Tiwari, AC to AAG- 3
For the BPSC : Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 14-10-2025
Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is one of the aspirant for the post
of Senior Secondary Teacher in terms with Advertisement No.
26/2023 has approached this Court seeking a direction upon the
respondents to include his name in the list of successful
candidates published on 18.10.2023, issued under the signature
of Examination Controller-cum-Joint Secretary in the subject of
Botany for appointment to the post of Senior Secondary
Patna High Court CWJC No.486 of 2024 dt.14-10-2025
2/6
Teacher. A prayer has also been made to disclose the cut off
score fixed against the Backward Class Category in he subject
of Botany and to consider his candidature for appointment.
3. Mr. Dinu Kumar, learned Advocate for the
petitioner taking this Court through the relevant prescription of
the Advertisement No. 26/2023 has submitted that admittedly
total 2738 posts were published for appointment to the post of
Senior Secondary Teachers in subject of Botany and the
petitioner belongs to Backward Class category, for which total
215 posts were published. In terms with Clause 6 of the
Advertisement, the minimum percentage was fixed for
appearing candidates to secure in the written examination
against the category of unreserved is 40%, for Backward Class
category is 36.5%, for Extremely Backward Class is 34% and
for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Unreserved female,
Physically Disabled candidate is 32%. It was made clear that the
candidates, who failed to obtain the minimum percentage as
mentioned above in their respective categories will be
considered out of selection process.
4. Referring to the corrigendum letter, the copy of
which is marked as Annexure-P/5, it is further submitted that it
was mandatory to obtain the qualifying marks provided the
Patna High Court CWJC No.486 of 2024 dt.14-10-2025
3/6
same shall be relaxed to the extent required for sending
recommendation up to 75% of the total vacancies or total
candidates, whichever is less, in the interest of candidate. He
further submits that the petitioner had secured 42 marks in
Teachers recruitment examination, nonetheless the candidates,
who secured less than 42 marks, they have been declared
successful.
5. Referring to the final result, it is further
contended that the final result also does not disclose under
which category the candidates have been declared successful
and in fact all of them have been shown to be selected against
the unreserved category. The entire result is said to be not in
consonance with the terms of the advertisement, which is
required to be revisited.
6. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the
Commission while refuting the submissions aforenoted has
submitted that admittedly the petitioner had secured 42 marks,
out of 120 marks, which comes to less than 35% and, as such,
the petitioner has been declared not successful. It is further
clarified that the petitioner was a candidate for the post of
Senior Secondary Teacher for Class-XI and XII in the subject of
Botany under Backward Class (05) under the captioned
Patna High Court CWJC No.486 of 2024 dt.14-10-2025
4/6
advertisement however, he could not achieved the minimum
qualifying marks, therefore, his case has not been considered.
Referring to Clause 6 of the Advertisement, he further submits
that according to the resolution contained in memo No. 2374
dated 16.07.2007 and letter no. 6706 dated 01.10.2008 of
Personnel Administrative Reforms Department, Government of
Bihar, it was mandatory for the candidate of Backward Class
Category to obtain 36.5% in the written examination.
7. Drawing the attention to the merit list of the
successful candidate (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) it is
submitted that only the candidates of unreserved (01) category
have been declared successful; Though, the Commission
published the cut off marks in different categories on
25.10.2023
for different classes, including Class-XI and XII,
under the captioned advertisement. The said cut off chart
manifestly shows that apart from unreserved category, not a
single candidate was available in other categories having
minimum qualifying marks. Therefore, their results was not
published, as they were not included in the merit list. It is also
submitted that the cut off marks of unreserved category, as
shown in the cut off chart is 39 for female candidate and for the
female candidates of any category, the minimum qualifying
Patna High Court CWJC No.486 of 2024 dt.14-10-2025
marks is 32 marks i.e. 38.4 marks out of 120 marks.
8. Having heard the learned Advocate for the
respective parties and after going through the materials available
on record, this Court finds that the facts are admitted to the
extent that the petitioner obtained 42, out of 120 marks in
Botany, which is less than the minimum qualifying marks of
43.8 for Backward Class category. The resolution contained in
Memo No. 2374 dated 16.07.2007, as also letter no. 6706 dated
01.10.2008 mandatorily required for the candidate of Backward
Class category to obtain 36.5% marks in the written
examination.
9. The contention of the petitioner extending
relaxation in the interest of candidate to the extent of
recommendation of at least 75% of the total number of
vacancies or number of candidates, whichever is less, according
to the need, also does not find substance in view of the specific
stand of the Commission that the aforesaid relaxation was not
contemplated for subject wise vacancies, rather it was the total
number of vacancies. Since the number of successful candidates
recommended to the appointing authority is more than 75% of
the total number of vacancies, therefore, the petitioner could not
be allowed to take this plea. The Commission further clarified
Patna High Court CWJC No.486 of 2024 dt.14-10-2025
the position that except the candidate under the unreserved
category, not a single candidate was found available in other
categories, who secured the minimum cut off qualifying marks,
therefore, the result was not published under any other
categories, except unreserved category.
10. The instances of alleged discrimination shown
by the petitioner has also been duly answered and clarified by
the Commission that for a female candidate of any category
minimum qualifying marks was 32% i.e. 38.4 marks, out of 120
marks, hence the contention of the petitioner that he secured
more marks than a female candidate, who got 39 marks would
also not come to his rescue, as the petitioner belongs to
Backward Class (male) category.
11. On all these counts, this Court does not find any
merit in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the same stands
dismissed.
(Harish Kumar, J)
uday/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 19.10.2025
Transmission Date NA
