Patna High Court - Orders
Pradeep Kumar Maurya vs The State Of Bihar on 26 June, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Sinha
Bench: Anil Kumar Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12062 of 2024
======================================================
Pradeep Kumar Maurya Son of Ram Bachan Maurya, Resident of Ahirauli,
P.O.- Ayar, District- Varanasi (U.P.)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt.
of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Education Officer, Aurangabad.
4. The District Programme Officer (Establishment Aurangabad), Aurangabad.
5. Head Master Middle School, Mungiya, Nabinagar, District-Aurangabad.
6. The Bihar Public Service Commission, through its Joint Secretary, Bihar
Public Service Commission, 15, Bailey Road, Patna- 800001.
7. The Joint Secretary-cum-Examination, B.P.S.C. 15, Bailey Road, Patna-
800001.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Sinha
Mr. Birendra Kumar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjay Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
3 26-06-20251. Heard the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant writ application has been filed seeking quashing of the memo no. 4349 dated 01.07.2024 (Annexure-P/9 series) issued by the respondent no. 4 / District Programme Officer, Establishment, Aurangabad whereby and whereunder the provisional appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that his appointment was found to be against Bihar Public Service Commission and Departmental Notification and the Patna High Court CWJC No.12062 of 2024(3) dt.26-06-2025 2/5 Reservation Policy of the Govt. of Bihar.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that BPSC published Advertisement No. 26/2023 (Annexure-P/1) inviting application from the eligible candidates for appointment of teachers for Primary Schools along with others. Clause-IVA of the Advertisement prescribed the qualification for appointment as a Primary Teacher. The qualification prescribed was Intermediate pass along with other qualification i.e. 60% marks in the eligibility test conducted by the CTET. It is next submitted that BPSC issued a corrigendum dated 19.06.2023 whereby the marks obtained in the eligibility test conducted by the CTET was lowered down. The marks required in the eligibility test for BC, EBC and UR(F) was lowered down to 55% and for SC, ST and differently abled candidates to 50%. It is submitted that the writ petitioner is an Intermediate trained candidate and has obtained more than 50% marks in CTET conducted by the CBSE but not got 60% or above marks in the CTET.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that petitioner is a resident of U.P. and was eligible in terms of the qualification prescribed by the corrigendum issued by the BPSC on 19.06.2023 for participating in the selection process for Patna High Court CWJC No.12062 of 2024(3) dt.26-06-2025 3/5 being considered for appointment as Primary Teachers. It is further submitted that the writ petitioner is differently abled and thus covered under the Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 read with Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Rules, 1996. The petitioner, thus, applied in pursuance of the Advertisement No. 26 / 2023 under differently abled category as stipulated in Clause 8(IV) of the advertisement for being considered for appointment on the post of School Teachers in Primary Schools (Class 1-V) as a disabled person.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that petitioner was selected and thereafter was called for counselling on 21.10.2023. The petitioner participated in the counselling thereafter provisional appointment letter was issued to him on 15.11.2023 (Annexure- P/4). The petitioner on 17.11.2023 was posted in school and joined and started discharging his duty as teacher in the school of his posting. The petitioner was surprised to receive memo no. 4349 dated 01.07.2024 (Annexure- P/9) issued by the District Programme Officer, Aurangabad whereby and whereunder the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12062 of 2024(3) dt.26-06-2025 4/5
6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that what is not disputed rather stands admitted is that initially when the Advertisement No. 26/2023 was issued, a candidate was required to have 60% marks in the eligibility test conducted by the CTET. Further, the required marks in the eligibility test conducted by CTET was lowered down to 55% for BC, EBC and UR(F) and 50% for SC, ST and Disabled Candidates by the corrigendum issued by the BPSC on 19.06.2023. It is next submitted that neither the Advertisement No. 26/2023 nor the corrigendum dated 19.06.2023 even remotely suggested that the said relaxation of marks is only meant for candidates of Bihar and outsiders are not entitled for said relaxation, as such, the authorities now cannot resile from the condition stipulated in the advertisement.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as recorded hereinabove the petitioner is differently abled candidate and is a resident of U.P. and relaxation has been given under the Disabilities Act and Rules a Central Enactment and not on account of the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (for SC, ST and other OBC) Act, 1991. It is further submitted that the State of Bihar cannot discriminate differently abled candidates based on residence.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12062 of 2024(3) dt.26-06-2025 5/5
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by giving the relaxation in the marks obtained in the eligibility test either conducted by the CTET or BTET is not an aspect of reservation. It is further submitted that once the said relaxation has been given without stipulating in the advertisement that the said relaxation is meant only for the candidates residing in the State of Bihar in that event the authorities now cannot pass any order adverse to the interest of the petitioner on the ground that he is a resident of U.P. and thus not entitled for the said relaxation.
9. Put up this case on 30.06.2025.
10. In the meantime, operation of order contained in memo nos. 4349 dated 01.07.2024 contained in Annexure -P/9 shall remain stayed.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/-
U