Dismissed

Rinku Kumari v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC9 Feb 2024L.P.A/321/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the selection for a PDS shop vacancy. The Court held that rules prescribed seniority in age for equivalent qualifications, rendering marks irrelevant. A direction was given to the Department to address the need for an additional shop, but the petitioner's second-rank claim was rejected as invalid. The appeal was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Principal Secretary to address the need for an additional PDS shop; Appeal dismissed.

Rinku Kumari Vs The State of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.321 of 2019 In

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1209 of 2019

¶3

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

¶4

Rinku Kumari Wife of Brajesh Kumar Yadav Resident of Rampurva, PostMahanwa, P.S.- Manjhauliya, West Champaran

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶10

The Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶11

The District Officer-cum-Collector, West Champaran at Bettiah.

¶12

The Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah Sadar, West Champaran.

¶13

The District-Supply Officer, Bettiah Sadar, West Champaran.

¶14

The Block Supply Officer Chanpatiya Block, West Champaran.

¶15

... ... Respondent/s

¶16

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Verma For the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶17

Date : 09-02-2024

¶18

The petitioner was before the learned Single Judge challenging the selection for filling up one vacancy of a PDS shop under the unreserved category of Rampurva Mahanwa Panchayat under Manjhaliya Block, West Champran. The selection was conducted as per Rule 9 of Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. One

¶19

Patna High Court L.P.A No.321 of 2019 dt.09-02-2024 2/3

¶20

person, who was senior in age to the petitioner but with equivalent qualification was selected. The petitioner’s contention before the learned Single Judge was that the petitioner having obtained more marks in the qualifying examination, she should have been considered above the other person.

¶21

We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has correctly found that when an eligibility is specified, there is no question of selection being conducted on the basis of marks obtained in the qualifying examination; unless there is a specific prescription for that. In fact, the control order under which the selection was made, speaks of the person senior in age, being selected on the qualification being equivalent. Hence, the petitioner’s higher marks in the qualifying examination pales to insignificance.

¶22

The petitioner then had a contention that the population of the area in which the PDS was established, require two PDS shops. The learned Single Judge considered the same and directed the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Govt. of Bihar to address the issue of establishing one more PDS shop. Even if an

¶23

Patna High Court L.P.A No.321 of 2019 dt.09-02-2024 3/3

¶24

additional PDS shop is established, the petitioner cannot claim for being appointed on the basis of her second rank obtained in the present selection. The present selection was conducted only for filling up one vacancy. If another PDS shop is established, necessarily a further advertisement has to be made and application received as also selection conducted. We find absolutely no reason to entertain the writ petition.

¶25

The appeal stands dismissed.

¶26

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

¶27

( Rajiv Roy, J)

¶28

kiran/neha/ -

¶29

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date	13.02.2024.
Transmission Date

Rinku Kumari v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinku Kumari 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

M/s Maa OIl Movers, Vs The State of Bihar

M/s Orion Security Solution Pvt. Ltd. Vs The General Manager of Bihar

Basant Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Kumar Vs The Union of India

Avadhesh Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

M/s S.K. Traders, Birla Mandir Road, Patna Vs The Bihar State Text Book Corporation Ltd.