Dismissed

Sujata Kumari and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC1 May 2017L.P.A/66/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two assistant professor candidates appealed against the rejection of their petitions for appointment due to acquiring NET qualification after the specified cutoff date. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the legal principle that all minimum prerequisite qualifications must be acquired before the cutoff or last application date.

What did the court decide?

Letters Patent Appeal dismissed; no error warranting reconsideration found in the learned Writ Court's order.

Sujata Kumari and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.66 of 2017 Arising out of

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13893 of 2016

¶4

===========================================================

¶5

Sujata Kumari, Wife of Tuntun Prasad Mahto, Resident of at Kali Ghat, Saray Road, P.O. Bhagalpur City, P.S. Tatarpur, District- Bhagalpur.

¶6

Niraj Kumar Sinha, son of Sri Rajesh Prasad Sinha, resident of At- Mushari, Rampur, P.O.- Nath Nagar, District- Bhagalpur.

¶7

Kanchana Kumari, Wife Sri Binay Kumar, resident of at Nanhku Mandal Tola, P.O. Durgapur, District- Khagaria.

¶8

Divya Rani, Wife of Vijay Kumar, resident of At- Ekania, P.S.- Manshi, District- Khagaria.

¶9

Anjali Kumari, daughter of Sachidanand Paswan, Resident of At + P.O. Bhaghipur, P.S. Alamnagar, District Madhepura.

¶10

Ashok Bharti, Son of Sri Satyanarayan Paswan, Resident of At P.O. Manpur, Via- Singheshwar, Distirct- Madhepura.

¶11

.... .... Appellant/s

¶12

Versus

¶13

The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Education Department Bihar, Patna.

¶14

The Chancellor of Universities of Bihar, Raj Bhawan, Patna.

¶15

Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna through its Secretary.

¶16

Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna.

¶17

Ashutosh Ashish, son of Sri Bindeshwar Prasad Yadav, Resident of Rampur, P.O. Rajpur, P.S. Pipra, District- Supaul

¶18

Chandra Shekhar Kumar, son of Sri Jharkhandi Rajak, R/o- at Khalifabad, P.O. Head Post Office, P.S. Kotwali, District- Bhagalpur

¶19

.... .... Respondent/s

¶20

===========================================================

¶21

Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arjun Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Amrendra Kumar, Advocate For the B.P.S.C. : Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Advocate

¶22

Patna High Court LPA No.66 of 2017 dt.01-05-2017

¶23

2/3

¶24

===========================================================

¶25

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and

¶26

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 01-05-2017

¶28

Delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. I.A. No. 239 of 2017 stands allowed.

¶29

Appellants’ prayer seeking permission to participate in the process of selection for appointment as Assistant Professor has been rejected both by the Bihar Public Service Commission and the competent authority primarily on the ground that the qualification of NET, which is prerequisite under the statute for appointment to the post in question, it is seen that this qualification was acquired by the appellants after the cut off date notified in the advertisement.

¶30

It is a well settled principle of law that all minimum prerequisite qualifications have to be acquired by a candidate before the cut off date or the date as notified in the advertisement and if no date has been notified, the last date for submission of the application form shall be treated to be the cut off date. In this case, admittedly, the appellants acquired the qualification much after the last date for submission of the application and taking note of the same, the learned Writ Court has dismissed the writ petition after considering the fact that the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court also hold so. In doing so, we are of the considered view that the learned Writ Court

¶31

Patna High Court LPA No.66 of 2017 dt.01-05-2017

¶32

3/3

¶33

has not committed any error warranting reconsideration.

¶34

The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed.

¶35

(Rajendra Menon, CJ)

¶36

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶37

P.K.P.

¶38

AFR/NAFR	N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE	N.A.
UploadingDate	02.05.2017
Transmission Date

Sujata Kumari and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujata Kumari and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Upendra Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shiva Kanta Prasad Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sudama Prasad and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Devendra Rai and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar and Ors.

The State Of Bihar and Ors. Vs Methodist Church In India and Anr.

Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Committee Karykarta Sangh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.