Dismissed¶34

Md. Saquib Ansari @ Saquib Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Apr 2026CWJC/3093/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, CWJC No.3093 of 2026, decided 23-04-2026, Partha Sarthy J (NAFR): BPSC Assistant Conservator of Forest (ACF) Examination 2026 per Advertisement no.2 of 2026; clause 4 age limit of 40 years as on cut-off 1.8.2025 for EBC candidates; petitioner (DOB 15.2.1983, EBC) over 42 years, held ineligible; clause 9 last date for online applications 2.2.2026 already lapsed; prayer for mandamus to relax age and permit appearance refused; writ application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court was of the opinion that there is no merit in the application filed by the petitioner. ¶33

Md. Saquib Ansari @ Saquib Ansari Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3093 of 2026

¶2

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

¶3

Md. Saquib Ansari @ Saquib Ansari S/o Md. Nayimuddin, Resident of village Mahuatola, P.S. and P.O.- Sohsarai, Dist.- Nalanda, (Bihar).

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

¶8

¶9

The Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna.

¶10

The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission Bihar, Patna.

¶11

The Examination Controller, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Jay, Advocate Mr. Prabhas Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Dr. Raisul Haque, SC- 10 For the BPSC : Mr. Gyandndra Kumar Shukla, Advocate

¶14

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

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT

¶16

Date : 23-04-2026

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) and learned counsel for the State of Bihar.

¶18

The petitioner has filed the instant application for

¶19

the following reliefs:

¶20

“ 1. (A) Mandamus commanding the respondents to

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.3093 of 2026 dt.23-04-2026 2/3

¶22

permit the petitioner to appear in Assistant Conservator of Forest (ACF) Examination 2026 in the light of advertisement no. 02/2026 (Published by Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna) by accepting his application form and by relaxing the age.

¶23

(B) Any other

¶24

relief/reliefs for which petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case may be given to him. ”

¶25

The matter in issue arises out of the respondent

¶26

BPSC having came out with Advertisement no.2 of 2026 for appointment to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest.

¶27

The petitioner who belongs to the EBC category has his date of birth as 15.2.1983 and was thus over 42 years of age on the cut off date of 1.8.2025 thus making him ineligible from appearing in the examination because of being over age.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent Commission be directed to permit the petitioner to appear in the examination by increasing the eligibility to the extent enabling the petitioner to appear in the examination.

¶29

On perusal of the Advertisement no.2 of 2026, a copy of which has been brought on record as Annexure-P/1 to

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.3093 of 2026 dt.23-04-2026 3/3

¶31

the application, clause 4 thereof deals with the age limit and it clearly stipulates that in case of the EBC category to which the petitioner belongs, the candidate/applicant should be at most 40 years on the date 1.8.2025. The date of birth of the petitioner being 15.2.1983, as on 1.8.2025, he was over 42 years in age.

¶32

Learned counsel for the BPSC further points out vide clause 9 of the advertisement that the last date of filing of the online application was 2.2.2026 which has crossed more than two months back.

¶33

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of the Court, there is no merit in the application filed by the petitioner.

¶34

The application is dismissed.

¶35

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶36

sauravkrsinha/-

¶37

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	24.4.2026
Transmission Date	NA

Md. Saquib Ansari @ Saquib Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Saquib Ansari @ Saquib Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pintu Sah @ Pintu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ganesh Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Pukar Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Sushma Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Neelam Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Jay Kumari Vs The State of Bihar