Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court

Arjun Kumar vs The State Bihar on 19 September, 2024

Author: Purnendu Singh

Bench: Purnendu Singh

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13951 of 2024
     ======================================================
     Arjun Kumar Son of Late Rameshwar Singh, Resident of Village- Gulab
     Singh Ke English, P.S.- Karpee, District- Arwal.
                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                          Versus
1.   The State Bihar through its Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
     Labour Resources Department, Bihar, Patna.
2.   The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Labour Resources
     Department, Bihar, Patna.
3.   The Director, Employment and Training Labour Resources Department
     Bihar, Patna.
4.   The Bihar Technical Service Commission, Bihar, Patna through its
     Secretary, Bihar, Patna.
5.   The In-charge Officer, Bihar Technical Service Commission, Bihar, Patna.
                                                            ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate.
                                     Ms. Priya Ranjan, Advocate
                                     Ms. Chandani Kumari, Advocate
                                     Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
     For B.T.S.C.            :       Mr. Nikesh Kumar, Advocate.
     For the State           :       Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
                         ORAL JUDGMENT
     Date : 19-09-2024
                   Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel

      appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Nikesh Kumar,

      learned counsel for the Bihar Technical Service Commission

      and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, learned AAG-13 for the State.

                        2. The petitioner in Paragraph No.1 of the present

      writ petition has sought, inter alia, following reliefs, which are

      reproduced hereinafter:

                                     "That this is an application for issuance of
                       an appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s), for quashing
                       undated order published by Bihar Technical Service
                       Commission with respect to selection of trade instructor
 Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024
                                           2/16




                         (Turner) with respect to Advertisement No. 11/2023 by
                         which the petitioner has been declared as not qualified for
                         Phase-2 which is totally bad, illegal as the score card has
                         been issued without adding 25 marks with the written
                         examination in the first phase as mandated by circular
                         contained in memo no. 1003 dated 22.01.2021 and the
                         clarification issued by State Government of Bihar contained
                         in letter no. 12956 dated 16.08.2024 and further for
                         direction to the respondent authorities to add the above said
                         25 marks with the marks obtained by the petitioner in the
                         written examination of the first phase and thereafter to
                         republish/ revise the result of first phase written
                         examination and further for consider their cases for second
                         phase examination and thereafter to publish the final results
                         and consider the case of the petitioner on the post of trade
                         instructor (Turner) with respect to advertisement no.
                         11/2023 and further for any other reliefs for which the
                         petitioner may found entitled to."




                         BRIEF FACTS

                         3. Brief facts of the case are that an Advertisement

         No. 10274 (Labour) 9-10 was published in Hindi Daily News

         paper     namely      "Dainik      Jagran"    on   07.03.2010       seeking

         application from eligible candidates for the post of 'Trade

         instructor' on contract basis. The petitioner having fulfilled the

         terms and conditions of the advertisement was appointed on

         contract basis for a period of one year as "trade instructors

         (Turner)" vide order no. 1836 dated 22.04.2010, after having

         found his position at serial no. 257. Thereafter vide letter no.

         2613 dated 18.06.2010, petitioner was posted at ITI, Dighaghat,

         Patna. The contract of the petitioner was renewed regularly year

         wise.
 Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024
                                           3/16




                         4. The Department of Labour Resources, Govt. of

         Bihar, had came out with "Bihar Industrial Training Instructor

         Cadre Rules 2018" vide Notification No. 950 dated 11.5.2018,

         which has gone subsequent amendment vide Notification No.

         2157 dated 07.10.2022 and in terms of the amended Rules, the

         Bihar Technical Service Commission had published an

         Advertisement No. 11 of 2023 calling for application for the

         permanent post of "Trade Instructor". The petitioners being

         eligible, had applied under Backward Classes Category and

         having not qualified, have filed the present writ petition.

                SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

                         5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

         petitioner submitted that the score card issued to the petitioner is

         not in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Bihar

         Industrial Training Instructor Cadre Rules, 2018.

                         6. Learned counsel further submitted that in

         accordance with the rules 2018, the petitioner would be deemed

         to be qualified, if the petitioner's case is considered in

         accordance with rule 9, sub rule (e), (f) and (l) by adding 25

         marks in 36.25% marks secured by him in 1 st phase of

         examination. Learned counsel, in this regard, has referred to

         clarification contained in Memo No. 1003 dated 22.01.2021 by
 Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024
                                           4/16




         the General Administration Department, and submitted that it

         has been clarified that the eligible candidates like the petitioner,

         who was/were appointed on contract basis, in terms of

         clarification made in Clause IV, weightage of maximum 25

         marks is required to be given to the candidate serving for more

         than 5 years satisfactorily and the said marks is required to be

         added to the marks obtained in written examination in First

         Stage in conformity with Rule 9(e) of Rules 2018. Learned

         counsel further submitted that it has further been clarified vide

         Letter No. 12956 dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure P/6) that the 25

         marks has to be added in both the phases i.e. first phase and in

         the second phase of the selection. It is admitted that the

         petitioner has obtained 36.25 percentage of marks in the

         computer based test and, as such, when in accordance with the

         requirement of Rule 9, Sub Rule (e), (f) & (l), 25 percent is

         added, the petitioner becomes qualified in both the phases.

                         7. Learned counsel in support of his stand has

         further tried to clarify that the minimum qualifying marks in

         terms of the clarification issued by the General Administration

         Department has not been followed in the case of the petitioner,

         who has secured 36.25 percent of marks out of 100 marks and

         by not adding 25 marks in addition to what marks he has
 Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024
                                           5/16




         obtained in first phase of the written examination the action of

         the respondents is contrary to the Rules and Clarification of the

         General Administration Department. The petitioner in support of

         his argument, has made a specific statement in paragraph no. 13

         of the writ petition, which is inter alia reproduced hereinafter:

                                          "13. That it is also relevant to mention here that
                         thereafter general administration department, government of
                         Bihar, issued a clarification notification contained in memo no.
                         12956 dated 16.08.2024 whereby and where under it has been
                         clarified that the marks has to be added in both the phases,
                         witage i.e. the weitage 25 marks has to be added to the marks
                         obtained in the written examination conducted in the first phase
                         and the said weitage marks has also to be given in the second
                         phase of the selection."



                         8. The petitioner has again reiterated the same in

         paragraphs no. 7 and 8 of the supplementary affidavit, which

         inter alia are reproduced hereinafter:

                                          "7. That it is stated and submitted that in view of
                         the abovesaid facts and circumstances it is manifestly apparent
                         that even certificates for requisite qualification of those
                         candidates have also been considered by the respondent
                         authorities regarding whom there was no mention in the
                         abovesaid advertisement no. 11/2023 dated 28.06.2023 and the
                         candidatures ship of all those candidates were considered and
                         benefits were given to them but the experience marks of 25 was
                         not added in the marks obtained by the petitioner in the written
                         examination though a clear direction has been given by rule
                         namely Bihar Industrial Training Instructor Cader Rules, 2018
                         made on 11.05.2018 itself and the circular contained in memo no.
                         1003 dated 22.01.2021 and clarification order contained in
                         memo no. 12956 dated 16.08.2024.
                                          8. That is is also relevant to mention here that
                         clause III of the abovesaid advertisement provides for the
                         procedures for selection and it sub clause I provides that there
                         will be a written examination in first phase and the candidate
                         who will qualify in the written examination will only appear in
                         the II phase and the experience marks of 25 marks was to be
                         added in the marks got by the petitioner in the written
                         examination in pursuance of abovesaid rules, circular dated
                         22.01.2021

and clarification order dated 16.08.2024 but the same has not been added which is totally violative of the abovesaid rules. Circular and orders."

Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 6/16

9. In paragraph no. 6 in reply to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents also he has reiterated the same, which is reproduced hereinafter:

"6. That in reply to the statement made in paragraph no. 12 of the counter affidavit under reply it is stated and submitted that it is totally false and misconceived. It is stated and submitted that from perusal of the advertisement it will manifestly be apparent that the selection process will be consisting of two phases, the first phase will be consisting of one written examination and it no were mentions any where regarding preliminary for mains and second phase provides only for preparation of merit list in a certain direction no where it has been mentioned that the experience marks will be given only to those candidate who will get the minimum qualification marks rather on the other hand, from the perusal of the above mentioned rules 2018, circular dated 22.01.2021 and clarification order dated 16.08.2024 it will be manifestly be evident that the experience marks of 25 marks has to be added to the marks obtained by the candidate in written examination and as such it is apparent that the above said statement made in paragraph no. 12 of the counter affidavit is totally baseless and misconceived."

SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

10. Per contra, Mr. Nikesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bihar Technical Service Commission referring to the score card (Annexure-P/7) submitted that petitioner's score card would reflect that out of full marks i.e. 100, the marks obtained by the petitioner is 36.25 percentage of marks, which is less than the marks in terms of the clause 3(h) of the Advertisement (Annexure-P/5) and for being considered in second phase and for preparation of merit list in terms of sub- clause (d) of clause (2), the petitioner was only required to have Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 7/16 been considered once he had obtained the minimum qualifying percentage marks. The contention of the petitioner for adding the weightage point in his written marks and that too without qualifying the written examination has got no leg to stand as in the advertisement itself there is no provision for adding the weightage point of work experience without qualifying the minimum marks in the written examination in the first stage.

ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION

11. Heard the parties.

12. Before I proceed to decide the main question involved in the present writ petition, whether the petitioner having appeared in the examination held on 10.09.2023 pursuant to the Advertisement No. 11 of 2023, the candidature instruction in the matter of selection and appointment were to be adhered strictly in terms of instruction?

13. In this regard, I find it apt to reproduce the relevant Rules and the terms and conditions of the aforesaid Advertisement dated 28.06.2023 as contained in paragraph no. 10 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 4 and 5.

14. Rule 9 provides for process of employment in the 2018 Rules and specifically Rules 9(E) states as follows :-

"(E) According to Notification No. 8025 dated Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 8/16 21.05.2013 of General Administrative Department, as against the requisition sent by the State Government for regular appointment on the vacant posts of Trade Instructors in Industrial Training Institute under Directorate Employment & Training (Training Wing) Labour Resources Department, Weightage of 05 (Five) marks for every year subject to maximum of 25 (Twenty five) marks will be given by considering one complete year for the period above as months of satisfactory service to those instructors, who have been employed and working on contract and who have all the prescribed qualifications for regular appointment. In the condition of excess age, relaxation of equivalent period will be given in maximum age for the experience of the period served in Directorate in Employment & Training (Training Wing)."

15. The respondents no. 4 and 5, in Paragraph no. 10 of their counter affidavit have brought relevant Clause-10, which is being reproduced hereinafter:

"10. p;u dh izfdz;k& ¼i½ izFke pj.k & "fyf[kr ijh{kk" - fyf[kr ijh{kk ds lHkh iz'u oLrqfu"B izd`fr ds cgqfodYih; gksaxsaA ijh{kk dh vof/k nks ?kaVs dh gksxh vkSj dqy vad 100 gksaxsA ijh{kk dk ikB~;dze &
(a) iz'Uk&i= esa dqy 100 iz'Uk gksaxs ftlesa 80 iz'u dk;Z{ks= Kku ,oa 20 iz'u lkekU; v/;;u fo"k; ds gksaxsA
(b) dk;Z{ks= Kku ¼80 iz'u½ ds vUrxZr iz'u] Hkkjr ljdkj ds Ministry of skill Development & Entrepreneurship ds Directorate General of Training }kjk Turner gsrq fu/kkZfjr v|ru Curriculum ds vuqlkj iqNs tk;saxsA
(c) 'ks"k 20 iz'u lkekU; v/;;u ,oa lelkef;d eqn~nksa ls lEcaf/kr iz'u iwNs tk;saxsA Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 9/16
(d) mDr ijh{kk ,d ls vf/kd ikfy;ksa esa Computer based Test ds ek/;e ls vk;ksftr fd;k tk;sxk ,oa ,d ls vf/kd ikfy;ksa esa ijh{kk vk;ksftr fd;s tkus ds dkj.k ijh{kk ifj.kke lekuhdj.k (Normalization) dh izfdz;k viukrs gq, rS;kj fd;k tk;sxkA
(e) ijh{kk esa xyr mŸkj ds fy, udkjkRed vadsu (Negative Marking) ykxw fd;k tk;sxkA izR;sd lgh mŸkj gsrq 01 vad ns; gksxk ,oa izR;sd xyr mŸkj gsrq ¼0-25½ vad dkVk tk;sxkA
(f) mDr ijh{kk ds vk/kkj ij lHkh vH;fFkZ;ksa dh lekuhdj.k (Normalization) dh izfdz;k viukrs gq, ijh{kk&Qy ?kksf"kr fd;k tk;sxkA
(g) lekuhdj.k (Normalization) ds i'pkr izkIr vad dks es/kk lwph rS;kj djus gsrq f}rh; pj.k esa mi;ksx fd;k tk;sxkA
(h) dkfeZd ,oa iz'kkfud lq/kkj foHkkx] fcgkj ds ladYi la[;k&2374 fnukad 16-07-2007 ,oa lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx] fcgkj ds ladYi la[;k&962 fnukad 22-01-2021 ds }kjk fyf[kr ijh{kk ds lkekU; oxZ ds fy, 40 %, fiNM+k oxZ ds fy,&36-5%] vR;ar fiNM+k oxZ ds fy,& 34% ,oa vuqlwfpr tkfr@vuqlwfpr tutkfr] efgykvksa rFkk fu%'kDrrk ls xzLr ¼fnO;kax½ mEehnokjksa ds fy, 32% fu/kkZfjr U;wure vgZrkad izkIr djuk vfuok;Z gksxkA Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 10/16 uksV % fyf[kr ijh{kk esa vH;fFkZ;ksa dks vius dksfV ds vuqlkj U;wure vgZrkad izkIr ugha gksus ij f}rh; pj.k gsrq vH;FkhZ dk dksbZ Hkh nkok ekU; ugha fd;k tk;sxkA(Emphasis Supplied)
(ii) f}rh; pj.k & p;u gsrq vH;fFkZ;ksa dh esfjV fyLV fuEu izdkj rS;kj dh tk;sxh &
a) fyf[kr ijh{kk ds izkIr vadksa ds izfr'kr dk 50 izfr'kr izR;sd vH;FkhZ dks fn;k tk;sxkA & 50 vad
b) jk"Vzh; O;olk; izek.k&i= ¼,u0Vh0lh0½@f'k{krk izek.k&i= ds fy, izkIr vadksa ds izfr'kr dk 20 izfr'kr izR;sd vH;FkhZ dks fn;k tk;sxkA & 20 vad
c) lh0vkbZ0Vh0,l0 ijh{kk esa izkIr vadksa ds izfr'kr dks 30 izfr'kr izR;sd vH;FkhZ dks fn;k tk;sxkA & 30 vad
d) Je lalk/ku foHkkx ds vUrxZr funs'kky;] fu;kstu ,oa izf'k{k.k ¼izf'k{k.k i{k½ ds v/khu vkS|ksfxd izf'k{k.k laLFkkukas esa O;olk; vuqns'kd ds in ij lafonk ij fu;ksftr ,oa dk;Zjr vH;FkhZ dks izfro"kZ dh x;h larks"ktud lsok ds fy, 05 vad izfro"kZ dh nj ls vf/kdre 25 vadksa dh vf/kekurk ¼fdlh o"kZ ds va'k ds fy, dk;Zfooj.kksa dh la[;k ds 05 ls xq.kk djus i'pkr~ 365 ls Hkxk nsdj izkIr vuqikfrd vad tksM+k tk;sxk½ nh tk;sxhA 25 vad dqy&125 vad 6- egRoiw.kZ funsZ'k %&
(i) vkWuykbZu vkosnu&i= ds fofgr dkWye esa vius lHkh Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 11/16 'kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk izek.k&i= ,oa vad izek.k&i= dh izfr rFkk vkj{k.k ls lEcaf/kr lwpuk dh izfof"V dj lHkh okafNr izek.k&i= fofgr Column esa Upload djuk lqfuf'pr djsaxsA dksbZ Hkh izek.k&i= Upload ugha fd;s tkus ij vH;fFkZ;rk jn~n djus gsrq vk;ksx Lora= gksxkA
(ii) dafMdk&3(ii)(d) ds vUrxZr dk;kZuqHko dk nkok djus okys mEehnokjksa }kjk lafonk ij dk;Zjr gksus dk dk;kZuqHko izek.k&i= ¼ifjf'k"V&1 esa layXu izk:i esa½ fuxZr djus ds fy, Je lalk/ku foHkkx] fcgkj ds vaUrXkZr funs'kky;] fu;kstu ,oa izf'k{k.k ¼izf'k{k.k i{k½ ds v/khu vkS|ksfxd izf'k{k.k laLFkkukas esa muds inLFkkiu LFky ds izkpk;Z@izHkkjh izkpk;Z l{ke izkf/kdkj gksaxsA 8- ;ksX;rk ls lEcaf/kr lHkh izek.k&i= ;Fkk& 'kS[kf.kd izek.k&i=] vkj{k.k gsrq fuxZr izek.k&i=] dk;kZuqHkko gsrq fuxZr izek.k&i= ogha ekU; gksaxsa] ftldk mYys[k mEehnokj us vius ewy vkWuykbZu vkosnu&i= esa fd;k gSA mDr lHkh izek.k&i=ksa ds fuxZr gksus dh frfFk 02-08-2023 ds iwoZ dk gksuk vko';d gSA 9- vkosnu izi= esa of.kZr lHkh izek.k&i= vad&i= dkmUlafyax ds le; ewy :i ls izLrqr djuk vfuok;Z gksxkA dkmUlsfyax esa izek.k&i= ugha izLrqr djus@=qfViw.kZ gksus dh n'kk esa vyx ls dksbZ Hkh izek.k&i=] vk;ksx }kjk Lohdkj ugha fd;k tk;sxkA mDr funsZ'k dk vuqikyu ugha djus okys vH;fFkZ;ksa dh vgZrk ds lEca/k esa fu.kZ; ysus gsrq vk;ksx Lora= jgsxkA Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 12/16 10- vkosnd ;g lqfuf'pr djsaxs fd lHkh okafNr izek.k&i= ewyh :i esa muds ikl vkosnu Hkjrs le; miyC/k gSA 13- vkosnd }kjk vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa lHkh izfof"V;ksa lko/kkuh ls Hkjh tk;sxhA Hkfo"; esa vkosnu esa fdlh izdkj dk ifjorZu@lq/kkj ekU; ugha gksxkA fdlh Hkh izdkj dh =qfV gsrq vk;ksx mŸkjnk;h ugha gksxk ,oa dksbZ Hkh izfrdwy ifj.kke gsrq vkosnd Lo;a ftEesokj gksaxsA vkWuykbZu vkosnu esas lq/kkj gsrq fdlh vkosnu ij dksbZ fopkj ugha fd;k tk;sxk ,oa oSls vkosnuksa dks fujLr dj fn;k tk;sxkA
16. The General Administration Department had came out with two clarificatory instructions contained in Memo No. 2374 dated 16.07.2007 and Memo No. 962 dated 22.01.2021, and in view o the same petitioner has submitted that the clarification made by the General Administration Department if applied in case of the petitioner, by adding 25 marks to the marks which has been obtained being 36.25 percent of marks, the petitioner qualifies for the second phase of the examination cannot be sustained.

17. In the present Advertisement No. 11 of 2023, there is no separate preliminary and mains examination but in the advertisement itself there has been provision for grant of weightage point in respect of work experience as would appear Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 13/16 from clause 3(ii)(d) putting condition that for being qualified for second phase of the recruitment process, the candidate must have to obtain the minimum qualifying marks in view of clause 3(i)(h). The petitioner had applied in BC category and has obtained 36.25 percentage of marks as merit point and his normalized score is also 36.25 percentage of marks, whereas in view of clause 3(i)(h) for being eligible for second phase, a candidate has to obtain minimum 36.50 percentage of marks and as such in view of the petitioner not obtaining the minimum qualifying marks, the commission has found him as not qualified for phase II and, as such, he didn't find place in merit list.

18. I have given a serious consideration to the two subsequent clarifications also in respect of the advertisement dated 28.06.2023, I find that nowhere, the clarification has changed the minimum marks required to be obtained in first phase of the examination. The petitioner too in paragraph no. 13 of the writ petition has not stated the very fact that irrespective of the percentage of marks, which has been prescribed in Sub- Clause (h) in paragraph no. 3 of the advertisement, 25 marks was to be added. Admittedly, the petitioner has obtained 36.25 percent, I find it proper to reproduce the statement made in Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 14/16 paragraph no. 13 of the writ petition, which inter alia is reproduced hereinafter:

"13. That is is also relevant to mention here that thereafter general administration department, government of Bihar, issued a clarification notification contained in memo no. 12956 dated 16.08.2024 whereby and whereunder it has been clarified that the marks has to be added in both the phases, weitage i.e. the weitage 25 marks has to be added to the marks obtained in the written examination conducted in the first phase and the said weitage marks has also to be given in the second phase of the selection."

19. In course of argument, learned counsel has tried to enlarge the scope of the clarification by submitting that in any case, the clarification in respect of paragraph no. 10(3) of the advertisement in respect of having qualified for second phase of examination would only mean that the weightage has to be given to the number of year considering the petitioner's experience 25 marks was required to be added first can only be said to be misconceived in view of the terms and conditions of the advertisement and even considering the clarification it cannot be said that in the term of the advertisement calling for participating in the selection procedure any deviation has been made following the procedure prescribed in Clause 3 to Clause 3(i)(h) and noted it in the Notification.

20. It is made clear that minimum qualifying marks is the benchmark for elimination of the candidature and it can only mean that the candidates, who obtain minimum marks as Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 15/16 contained in the terms and conditions of Clause-10 of the advertisement then only can qualify for the second phase and then up to 25 marks weightage will be added for giving weightage as per their experience, who have rendered their service as contractual employee.

21. The Apex Court in case of Union of India vs. Mahendra Singh reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 909 decided on 25.07.2022, upon considering the law laid has in clear terms held that the candidature instructions in the matter of selection and appointment were required to be adhered strictly in terms of the instructions. I find it apt to reproduce paragraphs no. 16 and 17 of the aforesaid judgment, which inter alia is as follows:

"16. The said principle has been followed by this Court in Cherukuri Mani v. ChieSecretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh wherein this Court held as under:
"14. Where the law prescribes a thing to be done in a particular manner following a particular procedure, it shall be done in the same manner following the provisions of law, without deviating from the prescribed procedure............."

17. Similarly, this Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) v. Abhilash Lal 12 and OPTO Circuit India Limited v. Axis Bank13 has followed the said principle. Since the advertisement contemplated the manner of filling up of the application form and also the attempting of the answer sheets, it has to be done in the manner so prescribed. Therefore, the reasoning given by the Division Bench of the High Court that on account of lapse of time, the writ petitioner might have attempted the answer sheet in a different language is not justified as the use of different language itself disentitles the writ petitioner from any indulgence in exercise of the power of judicial review."

12. (2020) 13 SCC 234

13. (2021) 6 SCC 707 Patna High Court CWJC No.13951 of 2024 dt.19-09-2024 16/16

22. The aforesaid principles laid down by the Apex Court is squarely applicable to the case in hand.

23. The petitioner, who is a Backward Class candidate, having not obtained 36.5 percent of the qualifying marks, in the first phase of examination, I don't find that by disqualifying the petitioners for phase-II, the respondents have committed any illegality in any manner or have deviated from the instruction contained in the Advertisement No. 11 of 2023.

24. I don't find any merit in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed.

25. There shall be no order as to cost.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/-

AFR/NAFR                A.F.R.
CAV DATE                N/A
Uploading Date          27.08.2024
Transmission Date       N/A