[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Hari Shankar Kumar vs Bihar State University Service ... on 13 March, 2026
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.595 of 2025
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18284 of 2024
======================================================
Hari Shankar Kumar, Son of Ram Naresh Sharma, Resident of
Village/Mohalla Narma, P.S. Hathauri, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. Bihar State University Service Commission, 8th Floor, Bihar School
Examination Board, Academic Building, Buddha Marg Patna - 800001
through its Secretary.
2. The Secretary, Bihar State University Service Commission, 8th Floor, Bihar
School Examination Board, Academic Building, Buddha Marg, Patna -
800001.
3. Jay Prakash University, Rahul Sanksritayan Nagar, Chapra through its
Registrar.
4. The Vice Chancellor, Jay Prakash University, Rahul Sanskritayan Nagar,
Chapra.
5. The Registrar, Jay Prakash University, Rahul Sanksritayan Nagar, Chapra.
6. Anil Kumar Son of Jhulan Singh, Resident of Village - Mohalla - Rampur
Noornagar, P.O. Kanhi, P.S. - Jalalpur, District- Saran.
7. Vidya Nand Ram Son of Gauri Ram, Resident of Village/Mohalla - Bargaon,
P.O. Bargaon, P.S. - Mairwa, District - Siwan.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Amit Anand, Advocate
For the J.P. Unv. : Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, Advocate
Mr. Chandan Kumar, Advocate
For the B.S.U.S.C. : Mr. Tuhin Shankar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR)
Date : 13-03-2026
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective
parties.
2. The challenge in the present intra-court appeal is
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
2/16
made to an order/judgment dated 21.03.2025 passed by the
learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.18284 of 2024, whereby
the learned Court, having found no merit in the writ petition,
dismissed the same.
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present
appeal are that the petitioner, along with other eligible
candidates submitted their applications for appointment to the
post of Assistant Professor in the subject of History, pursuant to
Advertisement No.AP-HIST-08/20-21. A corrigendum to the
said advertisement was subsequently issued by the Commission
on 02.12.2020, extending the last date for submission of online
applications through the Commission's web portal up to
10.12.2020
and for receipt of the downloaded hard copy of the
online application, along with photocopies of all requisite
documents and degree certificates, up to 30.12.2020 till 5:00
PM. The petitioner, along with others, duly submitted their
online application form, uploaded all necessary documents, and
thereafter dispatched the hard copy of the application along with
the uploaded documents through speed post within the
stipulated time.
4. Upon scrutiny of the applications, the Commission
issued a public notice dated 14.10.2024, duly uploaded on its
official website, informing candidates about deficiencies found
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
in certain applications and granting them an opportunity to
rectify the same within the prescribed period. The petitioner's
application was rejected on the ground that the five-point Ph.D.
certificate submitted by him had not been issued by the
competent authority.
5. Aggrieved by the said decision, the petitioner
(appellant herein) along with two other candidates filed a writ
petition bearing C.W.J.C. No.18284 of 2024 seeking quashing
of the Commission's decision whereby their applications had
been rejected.
6. So far as petitioner no.3 (Vidya Nand Ram) in
C.W.J.C. No.18284 of 2024 is concerned, he had submitted the
five-point Ph.D. certificate issued by the Dean of the concerned
University, which was found to be in conformity with
Advertisement No. AP-HIST-08/20-21. Consequently, he was
issued an interview letter, participated in the selection process,
and his grievance stood redressed.
7. However, petitioner no. 1, Hari Shankar Kumar (the
appellant herein), and petitioner no. 2, Anil Kumar, contended
before the learned Single Judge that in terms of Clause 4.1(ii) of
the advertisement, a candidate seeking consideration for his/her
appointment to the post of Assistant Professor (History) was
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
required to submit a five-point Ph.D. certificate duly signed by
the Registrar/Dean of the concerned University on or before
10.12.2020. They asserted that they had submitted their five-
point Ph.D. certificates prior to the cut-off date; however, their
candidature was rejected solely on the ground that the
certificates had been issued under the signature of the Vice-
Chancellor of the University.
8. Notwithstanding the public notice informing the
candidate(s) to make necessary correction, petitioner nos. 1
(appellant) and 2, in C.W.J.C. No.18284 of 2024, were not
permitted to submit fresh five-point Ph.D. certificates duly
signed by the Registrar, even though the certificates issued by
the Vice-Chancellor were not accepted as being in compliance
with the advertisement.
9. Moreover, petitioners no.1 and 2 (in C.W.J.C.
No.18284 of 2024), upon coming to know of the rejection of
their applications, immediately approached the University and
obtained five-point Ph.D. certificates duly signed by the
Registrar, which they submitted before the respondent-
Commission. Hence, there was no substantive deficiency in
their qualifications; nevertheless, they were not allowed to
participate in the interview process.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
10. The non-consideration of five-point Ph.D.
certificates of petitioners no. 1 and 2 (in C.W.J.C. No.18284 of
2024), issued by the Vice-Chancellor of the University, is said to
be an arbitrary exercise of power by the respondent-
Commission. The action of the Commission was high-handed
and whimsical, resulting in serious civil consequences,
including the loss of a valuable opportunity to be appointed as
Assistant Professor in a constituent college; was the contention
of the learned counsel for the petitioners before the learned
Single Judge.
11. On the contrary, the University Service
Commission vigorously refuted the petitioners' contentions and
submitted that petitioners no.1 and 2 had admittedly failed to
submit the five-point Ph.D. certificates in the manner prescribed
under the advertisement prior to the cut-off date. Their
applications, being in breach of the terms and conditions of
Advertisement No. AP-HIST-08/20-21, were therefore rightly
rejected. It was further submitted that Clause 7 of the impugned
order clearly stipulates that candidates whose applications were
rejected on the ground of non-submission of the five-point
Ph.D. certificate duly signed by the Registrar of the concerned
University would not be granted any further opportunity to
produce the same.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
12. The Commission also placed reliance on the
judgment rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Dr.
Alok Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar & Ors., [C.W.J.C. No.
10670 of 2024] and other analogous case, wherein the Court, in
similar factual circumstances, declined to interfere on the
ground that there was no provision for relaxation of the terms
and conditions of the advertisement or the relevant rules. The
learned Single Judge, upon hearing the parties and finding merit
in the submissions advanced on behalf of the Commission,
dismissed the writ petition. The said order/judgment is under
challenge in the present appeal.
13. The learned Advocate for the appellant while
questioning the legality of the order of the judgement under
appeal, has submitted that pursuant to the Gazette Notification
dated 4th May 2016, Clause 3.3.1 of the relevant Regulations
mandates that the five-point certificate be certified by the Vice-
Chancellor/Pro Vice-Chancellor/Dean (Academic Affairs)/Dean
(University Instructions). In the present case, the five-point
Ph.D. certificate was duly issued and certified by the Vice-
Chancellor of the concerned University in favour of the writ
petitioner-appellant, and the same was uploaded along with the
application form within the prescribed time. It is contended that
the Vice-Chancellor being the competent authority under the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
Regulations, the non-acceptance of the said certificate and the
consequent rejection of the appellant's candidature is wholly
arbitrary and unsustainable in law. It is further submitted that, in
any event, the certificate was subsequently duly certified by the
Registrar of the University in light of the amended Regulations
dated 18th July 2018 and thereby removed the alleged procedural
deficiency, if any.
14. The learned Advocate for the appellant further
contended that in somewhat similar circumstances, the teaching
experience of another candidate for appointment to the post of
Assistant Professor in the Department of Commerce was
rejected solely on the ground that the experience certificate had
not been countersigned by the Registrar of the University. In
that context, the learned Division Bench of this Court in
Anuradha Singh v. The Bihar State University Service
Commission & Ors. [L.P.A. No.109 of 2025], held that not
awarding any marks to the appellant on the basis of teaching
experience only on the ground that it was not countersigned by
the Registrar would be unfair and would not be in consonance
with the purposive reading of the Statute as also of the
advertisement. It is lastly contended that the genuineness of
five-point certificate issued in favour of the appellant has never
been questioned by the respondents. In such circumstances, it is
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
urged that the certificate submitted along with the application
form ought to be treated as valid and in conformity with the
advertisement, and the appellant deserves to be considered for
interview. The order passed by the learned Single Judge in
C.W.J.C. No. 10670 of 2024, is said to be contrary to the ratio
and findings recorded by the learned Division Bench in L.P.A.
No. 109 of 2025.
15. Mr. Tuhin Shankar, the learned Advocate for the
Commission, has supported the order passed by the learned
Single Judge of this Court by placing reliance upon the
decisions in The Bihar State University Service Commission &
Ors. v. Amiya Shekhar & Ors. [L.P.A. No. 653 of 2024], Bihar
State University Service Commission & Anr. v. Alka Kumari
[L.P.A. No.777 of 2024] and Dr. Alok Kumar Singh v. The
State of Bihar & Ors. [C.W.J.C. No.10670 of 2024]. It is
submitted that in the afore-noted cases, the learned Division
Bench as well as the learned Single Judge, placing reliance upon
the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bedanga
Talukdar v. Saifudaullah Khan [(2011) 12 SCC 85] and the
decision rendered by the Full Bench of this Court in Braj
Kishore Prasad v. State of Bihar [1998 (3) PLJR 34], have
held that the selection process must be conducted strictly in
accordance with the procedure stipulated in the advertisement. It
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
has been further held that no relaxation of the terms and
conditions of the advertisement is permissible unless such
power is expressly reserved in the advertisement itself or under
the rules governing the selection process. Learned counsel for
the Commission, while concluding his submission, further
argued that none of the candidates, whose candidature has been
rejected on the ground that they have not submitted their five-
point Ph.D. certificate duly issued/signed by the Registrar has
been allowed any opportunity to produce the same.
16. We have considered the submissions advanced and
perused the order/judgement passed by the learned Single
Judge; before proceeding further, it would be worth benefiting
to discuss the relevant terms and conditions of the advertisement
in question.
17. After careful perusal and scrutiny of clause 4.1.(ii)
of Advertisement No. AP-HIST-08/20-21, it appears that the
candidates who have not qualified the National Eligibility Test
conducted by the UGC or the CSIR or a similar test accredited
by the UGC can also participate for the post of Assistant
Professor, provided that such a candidate is a holder of the Ph.D.
Degree in accordance with UGC regulations 2009 or 2016 and
the amendments made from time to time as the case may be.
Provided further that the candidates registered for UGC
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
programmes prior to July 11th, 2009 shall be governed by the
provisions of the then existing ordinance/ bylaws/ regulations of
the institution awarding the degree subject to fulfillment of the
following five conditions:-
(a) The Ph.D. Degree of the
candidate has been awarded in a regular mode;
(b) The Ph.D. Thesis has been
evaluated by at least two external examiners;
(c) An open Ph.D. Viva Voce of the
candidate has been conducted;
(d) The Candidate has published two
research papers from his / her Ph.D. work, out
of which at least one is in a referred journal;
(e) The candidate has presented at least
two papers based on his/her Ph.D. work in
conferences /Seminars sponsored/funded/supported
by the UGC/ICSSR/CSIR or any similar agency.
Further, in terms with the University Grants
Commission Notification dated 18.07.2018, the fulfillment of
these conditions is to be certified by the Registrar or the Dean
(Academic Affairs) of the University concerned, which is
categorically stipulated in the advertisement itself.
18. The case of the appellant, as borne out from the
materials available on record, clearly indicates that the five-
point certificate relating to the Ph.D. degree, purportedly issued
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
under the signature of the Vice-Chancellor of the University,
was not in conformity with the specific requirements prescribed
under the UGC Regulations dated 18 July 2018. Furthermore,
the five-point certificate relating to the Ph.D. degree, certified
by the Registrar of the University, as now relied upon by the
petitioner-appellant, was submitted much after the stipulated
last date for uploading the online application as well as for filing
the hard copy thereof.
19. Now, it would be apposite to refer to the decision
rendered by the Full Bench of this Court in Braj Kishore
Prasad (supra), wherein the learned Full Bench, in its
penultimate paragraph, observed as follows:-
"26. Having regard to all these
considerations, I hold that:
(a) Where the advertisement specifies
the last date for filing of supporting or other
documents, that date must be given effect to,
and any document received after such date shall
be rejected by the selecting authority.
(b) In appropriate cases where the
selecting authority is of the view that the time
for furnishing of documents should be extended,
it may grant such extension by issuing a public
notice to this effect so that all candidates may
get the benefit of such extension. In the absence
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
of any such extension granted by the selecting
authority, the date/dates mentioned in the
advertisement should be treated to be the last
date for filing of documents, and no document
shall be accepted thereafter.
(c) No application/document shall be
entertained by the Commission if the same is
filed after the last date specified in the
advertisement, or the extended date notified by
the commission, even if the same is filed before
the finalisation of the select list.
(d) In appropriate cases where this
Court is satisfied that a case of extreme
hardship or injustice has resulted on account of
factors beyond the control of the concerned
candidate, this Court in exercise of its writ
jurisdiction may grant relief in deserving cases.
But in doing so, the Court must be satisfied that
the candidate concerned has acted diligently,
and is not guilty of delay or laches in taking
necessary steps for procurring the requisite
certificates, etc. However, no relief shall be
granted where the requisite certificate is
produced for the first time after the process of
selection is complete and the selecting authority
has made its recommendation."
20. It would also be worthy to recapitulate the
decision of Bedanga Talukdar (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, while considering the relevance and binding nature of the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
terms and conditions stipulated in the advertisement
underscored their significance and held as follows:
"In our opinion, it is too well settled
to need any further reiteration that all
appointments to public office have to be made
in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution
of India. In other words, there must be no
arbitrariness resulting from any undue favour
being shown to any candidate. Therefore, the
selection process has to be conducted strictly in
accordance with the stipulated selection
procedure. Consequently, when a particular
schedule is mentioned in an advertisement, the
same has to be scrupulously maintained. There
cannot be any relaxation in the terms and
conditions of the advertisement unless such a
power is specifically reserved. Such a power
could be reserved in the relevant statutory
rules. Even if power of relaxation is provided in
the rules, it must still be mentioned in the
advertisement. In the absence of such power in
the rules, it could still be provided in the
advertisement. However, the power of
relaxation, if exercised, has to be given due
publicity. This would be necessary to ensure
that those candidates who become eligible due
to the relaxation, are afforded an equal
opportunity to apply and compete. Relaxation
of any condition in advertisement without due
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
publication would be contrary to the mandate
of equality contained in Articles 14 and 16 of
the Constitution of India..."
21. Now, adverting to the decision rendered by the
learned Division Bench of this Court in Anuradha Singh
(supra), upon which heavy reliance has been placed, admittedly
the observations made therein were confined to the peculiar
facts of the appellant's case and were not intended to be treated
as a precedent of general application. The learned Division
Bench, while distinguishing the earlier decision rendered in
Amiya Shekhar (supra), took note of the fact that in the said
case the candidate had submitted the requisite certificate at a
highly belated stage, when the selection process had already
progressed substantially. In contrast, in Anuradha Singh
(supra), the selection process in respect of the Department of
Commerce had not commenced as on the relevant date. It would
also be pertinent to take note of the decision of the learned
Division Bench in Amiya Shekhar (supra), wherein it was
emphatically held that marks under the head of teaching/post-
doctoral experience can be awarded only on the basis of a
certificate duly countersigned by the Registrar of the concerned
University.
22. Similarly, in The Bihar State University Service
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
Commission v. Anurag Kumar Sinha @ Anurag Ambasta
[L.P.A. No. 698 of 2024], the learned Division Bench vide its
judgment dated 24.10.2024, observed that where the experience
certificate was not in consonance with the prescribed
requirements and the candidate had failed to submit the requisite
certificate before the last date of submission of the online
application form without even making any attempt to obtain a
certificate in conformity with the stipulated conditions, the same
could not be entertained thereafter. The Court reiterated that
submission of a teaching experience certificate duly
countersigned by the Registrar beyond the prescribed last date
would not be permissible.
23. Upon careful consideration of the aforesaid
decisions discussed hereinabove, there remains no hesitation in
holding that the selection process must be conducted strictly in
accordance with the procedure stipulated in the advertisement,
unless there exists a specific provision for relaxation of the
terms and conditions, either in the advertisement itself or under
the statutory rules governing the selection process. Once the
candidature of the appellant was found not to be in consonance
with the prescribed terms and conditions of the advertisement in
question, its rejection cannot be said to suffer from any
illegality.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
24. Further, the contention of the Commission that no
such candidate has been allowed, whose candidature has been
rejected on account of his failure to submit five-point Ph.D.
certificate signed by the Registrar and this statement has neither
been refuted nor any document/evidence has been brought on
record to make out his claim on parity; rather the instances are
otherwise.
25. In view thereof, this Court finds no perversity and
illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
Accordingly, the present intra-court appeal, being devoid of
merit, stands dismissed.
(Harish Kumar, J)
Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ: I agree.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
rohit/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 25.02.2026
Uploading Date 13-03-2026
Transmission Date
