Candidates who scored below cut-off marks in the Combined Competitive Main Examination sought appointment against posts left unfilled by non-reporting selectees. The court found no waiting list was prepared and no vested right arose from inclusion in the counselling list; the appeal failed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.419 of 2022
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20690 of 2018
======================================================
... ... Appellant/s
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Gaurav Govind, Adv Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Pandey, Adv For the State : Mr. Prabhat Kr. Verma, AAG-3. Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, A.C. to AAG-3. For BSSC : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Sr. Advocate Mr. Abhishek Anand, Advocate Ms. Kanupriya, Advocate ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Single Judge dated 12.07.2022 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 20690 of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.419 of 2022(17) dt.14-10-2025 2/6
“Matter was heard for sometime.
2. Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna, filed a chart vide Annexure-R-3/B, highlighting the information relating to four appellants. Appellants-Vinod Kumar Singh and Suraj Kumar have claimed under BC category and they have secured 499 and 487 marks respectively, whereas the cut-off marks is 503 (last candidate) for the post of Co-operative Extension Officer. Appellant-Raushan Kumar under MBC category has secured 483 marks, whereas the last selected candidate has secured 493 marks. Similarly, Appellant-Subodh Paswan under SC category has secured 437 marks and the last selected candidate under SC category has secured 458 marks. It is further submitted that 597 posts of Co-operative Extension Officer were notified. Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna, have recommended 596 posts to the Appointing Authority/State Government. State Government has issued order of appointment to only 521. There is no response from the State official respondents as to why they have restricted in filling up of only 521 posts of Co-
Patna High Court L.P.A No.419 of 2022(17) dt.14-10-2025 3/6
operative Extension Officer instead of 596 is not forthcoming. Therefore, the concerned authority is hereby directed to file a personal affidavit along with the relevant records/decision taken by the State Government or the authority restricting filling up of 521 posts of Cooperative Extension Officer instead of 596. This information shall be furnished. That apart, Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna, as well as the State official respondents are hereby directed to apprise as to whether there is concept of preparation of wait list/ additional list or not?, this information shall be furnished only with reference to the relevant Rules of Recruitment governing various posts of Category-B in the State Government.
3. Re-list this matter on 10.09.2025.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna, have recommended for various posts like Secretariat Assistant- 332, Child Protection Officer-20, Superintendent (Social Welfare Department)-4, Auditor-129 as against 130 posts, Accountantcum-Store Keeper-24, House Keeper-cumClerk-65. On the other hand, Appointing Authority/State Government have not filled up the aforementioned recommended all the xposts. On the other hand, they have restricted in the following manner, namely:
“i. Secretariat Assistant-316.
ii. Child Protection Officer-16.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.419 of 2022(17) dt.14-10-2025 4/6
iii. Superintendent(Social Welfare Department)-2.
iv. Auditor-105.
v. Accountant-cum-Store
Keeper-16.
vi. House Keeper-cum-Clerk-30.”
In this regard, the concerned State official respondents are hereby directed to apprise this Court as to why they have not filled up all those vacancies which were recommended by the Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna. In this regard, whatever the decisions taken on the administrative side shall be furnished in original on the next date of hearing, failing which adverse order would be passed against such of those custodian of those records (State officials).”
Patna High Court L.P.A No.419 of 2022(17) dt.14-10-2025 5/6
candidates among 596 candidates, whether appellants could be considered for selection and appointment to those 75 post of Cooperative Extension Officer or not is the subject matter. In other words, on recommendation of 596 candidates for the post of Co-operative Extension Officer, the State Government has appointed 596 whereas only 521 candidates have reported for duty. The remaining 75 vacancies were required to be carried forward to the next recruitment as per the State Government policy.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.419 of 2022(17) dt.14-10-2025 6/6
Appellants have no vested right to the extent that their names were reflected in the counselling list. In fact, Hon’ble Supreme Court time and again held that merely reflecting candidates name in the select list does not have any vested right.
(P. B. Bajanthri, CJ)
( Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
kiran/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether unsuccessful candidates whose names appeared only in the counselling list could be appointed against 75 posts left vacant by non-reporting selected candidates.
Whether candidates have a vested right to appointment merely because their names are reflected in a select or counselling list.
Vinod Kumar Singh
Raushan Kumar
Suraj Kumar
Subodh Paswan
The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary
Bihar Staff Selection Commission through its Secretary
P. B. Bajanthri
Alok Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
