Writ petitions challenging a Fishery Directorate recruitment were dismissed following the Division Bench decision in Avinash Kumar v. State of Bihar, which had upheld selection with weightage for contractual employees under the Article 309 rule.
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 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11694 of 2022
======================================================
Patna High Court CWJC No.11694 of 2022(10) dt.16-07-2025 2/6
Muriyari, P.S. - Sakra, District -Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus
Patna High Court CWJC No.11694 of 2022(10) dt.16-07-2025 3/6
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16312 of 2022
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11694 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25 (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16098 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, SC-19 (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16312 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, SC-19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
Patna High Court CWJC No.11694 of 2022(10) dt.16-07-2025 4/6
ORAL ORDER
10 16-07-2025
Learned Advocate for the respective parties are
present.
“14. We also have to pertinently observe that despite the persons who sought interventions having been impleaded, the persons who were specifically named in the memorandum of writ petition have not been impleaded in its entirety, as seen from the tabular form. Both the writ petitions are imperfect in so far as the same being not properly instituted, for reason of it being defective for non-impleadment of necessary parties.
Patna High Court CWJC No.11694 of 2022(10) dt.16-07-2025
5/6
prevails. The rule as brought out, granting weightage to contractual employees, is only to the extent of providing a maximum of 25 marks for every completed year of service; each year being granted 5 marks. The cited decisions of this Court approve such weightage being granted. As was found in Abhay Kumar Patel (supra), it does not exclude the candidates from the general public and only enables a weightage to those persons who are employed contractually, that too appointed after a regular process of selection, in compliance with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. But for the contentions aired of the appointments having been made to temporary posts in temporary projects and not in sanctioned posts, there is no allegation raised with respect to the persons who have been given weightage having been appointed though the backdoor in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Patna High Court CWJC No.11694 of 2022(10) dt.16-07-2025 6/6
present writ petition stands dismissed in terms with the aforenoted decision.
(Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioners identically situated to those whose claims were rejected by the Division Bench in Avinash Kumar could claim relief in the same recruitment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Avinash Kumar and Others v. The State of Bihar and OthersFollowed¶4
C.W.J.C. No.2043 of 2021
Varun Kumar and others
The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Animal Husbandry and Fishery Department
The Additional Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar
The Director, Fishery Directorate, Government of Bihar
The Chairman, Bihar Technical Service Commission
The Secretary, Bihar Technical Service Commission
Harish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
