Patna High Court
Kiran KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The cut‑off date fixed in Advertisement No. 12/2026 complies with Rule 6(a) of the Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment) Rules, 1955 and is not arbitrary; therefore the writ petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Kiran Kumari, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash Clause 3 of Advertisement No. 12/2026 for the 33rd Bihar Judicial Service Examination, alleging that the cut‑off date of 01‑08‑2022 for the maximum age of unreserved female candidates violated a 2006 departmental letter and should have been 01‑08‑2020. The respondents contended that the cut‑off date is governed by Rule 6(a) of the Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment) Rules, 1955, which fixes the date as 1 August of the preceding year of the examination. The Court examined the statutory rule, prior advertisements (2020 and 2023), and held that the 2022 cut‑off is consistent with Rule 6(a) because the last exam was held in 2023. It further noted that the departmental letter cannot override the statutory provision and that similar issues had been decided in Ram Milan Thakur (2020) and Vijaya Jaiswal (2020). Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Dr Ami Lal Bhat (1997), the Court affirmed that the employer’s discretion in fixing cut‑off dates is not arbitrary unless unreasonable. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as having no merit.
Issues considered
- Whether the cut‑off date of 01‑08‑2022 for the maximum age of unreserved female candidates in Advertisement No. 12/2026 is arbitrary and violative of the 2006 departmental letter.
- Whether Rule 6(a) of the Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment) Rules, 1955 governs the fixation of the cut‑off date and supersedes the departmental letter.
- Whether the High Court can quash the advertisement on the ground of arbitrariness.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment) Rules, 1955 — s. Rule 4, Rule 6(a)
- Constitution of India — s. Article 226, Article 234
Subjects
- age limit
- cut‑off date
- Bihar Judicial Service Examination
- Rule 6(a)
- Article 226
- administrative discretion
- arbitrariness
- writ petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6500 of 2026
======================================================
Kiran Kumari Wife of Mukesh Kumar, resident of - New Bigrahpur,
Phulwari, P.O.-Patna, P.S.-Bigrahpur, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary General,
Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The High Court of Judicature at Patna through Registrar General, Patna
High Court, Patna.
3. The Bihar Public Service Commission through the Chairman, Bihar Public
Service Commission,Patna.
4. The Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna.
5. The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna.
6. The Joint Secretary cum Examination Controller, Bihar Public Service
Commission, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sushant Praveer, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9
Mr. Shashank Shekhar Dubey, AC to SC-9
For the B.P.S.C. : Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Adv.
For the P.H.C. : Mr. Piyush Lall, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR)
Date : 29-04-2026
Heard Mr. Mrigank Mauli, learned Senior Advocate
alongwith Mr. Sushant Praveer, learned Advocate for the
petitioner. Mr. Kinkar Kumar, learned Standing Counsel No. 9
for the State and Mr. Sanjay Pandey, learned Advocate for the
Bihar Public Service Commission. The Patna High Court is
represented through Mr. Piyush Lall, learned Advocate.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6500 of 2026 dt.29-04-2026
2/9
2. The writ petitioner, by invoking the extraordinary
jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, is seeking quashing of Clause 3 of the Advertisement
No. 12/2026 issued for holding 33rd Bihar Judicial Service
Competitive Examination, to the extent of fixation of the cut-off
date for eligible maximum age. The said fixation of the cut-off
date for maximum age for eligibility is said to be in gross violation
of the Departmental Letter No. 212 dated 23.01.2006 issued by the
Government of Bihar in the Department of Personnel and
Administrative Reforms. The petitioner also sought a direction
upon the respondents to amend Clause 3 of the captioned
Advertisement No. 12/2026 and fix the cut-off date for maximum
age eligibility to 01.08.2020, instead 01.08.2022.
3. Learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Mauli, while
pressing the present application has submitted that the specific
purpose of fixation of cut-off date with respect to age in
Government services/cadres, has been addressed by the General
Administration Department vide letter no. 212 dated
23.01.2006. By the afore-noted letter, it has been specifically
provided that the review of vacancies must be carried out each
year and thereafter the requisition for each year vacancy must be
forwarded to the Bihar Public Service Commission or the
Patna High Court CWJC No.6500 of 2026 dt.29-04-2026
3/9
recruitment agency. If the vacancy is not reviewed each year and
requisition is not forwarded to the Commission, the candidates
who fulfill the age criteria in the last advertisement, in case have
crossed the age limit till fresh advertisement is issued, they must
not be denied to appear in such examination. To clarify the
aforesaid position and strengthen his submission, he submitted
with all vehemence that the last advertisement for the post of Civil
Judge (Junior Division) was issued in the year 2023 vide
Advertisement No. 23/2023 for holding 32nd Bihar Judicial Service
Examination, whereafter for three years no vacancy was
advertised. Clause 3 of the Advertisement No. 23/2023 clearly
stipulated the maximum age at forty years for unreserved female
category, by giving the cut-off date as 01.08.2019.
Similar was the position in 31st Bihar Judicial Service
Examination when Advertisement No. 04/2020 was issued. In
the said advertisement, under Clause 3, the maximum age for
unreserved female category was fixed at forty years and the cut-
off date was mentioned as 01.08.2018; but surprisingly, in the
Advertisement No. 12/2026 for conducting 33rd Bihar Judicial
Service Examination, the cut-off date for unreserved female
category has been arbitrarily fixed at 01.08.2022 instead of
01.08.2020, which ought to have been adhered by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.6500 of 2026 dt.29-04-2026
4/9
respondents as has been done in the previous advertisement. On
account of such arbitrary fixation of the cut-off date of
maximum age for unreserved female category, the petitioner, an
aspirant for the Advertisement No. 12/2026 has been deprived
from appearing in the examination.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Piyush Lall, learned
Advocate for the Patna High Court has submitted that the prayer
of the writ petitioner is wholly misconceived and not tenable in
the eye of law, specially in terms with 3rd proviso to Rule 4 and
Rule 6(a) of the Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch)
(Recruitment) Rules, 1955. It is further submitted that similar
issue has also come up for consideration before this Court in
C.W.J.C. No. 5619 of 2020 (Ram Milan Thakur -Vrs.- The
State of Bihar & Ors.) with C.W.J.C. No. 5638 of 2020 (Vijaya
Jaiswal & Ors. -Vrs.- The State of Bihar & Ors.) where the
issue has been clarified.
5. The learned Advocate for the Commission as well
as the State also opposed the relief sought for in the writ
petition.
6. After having heard the learned Advocate for the
respective parties, before parting with the present writ petition it
would be apt and proper to discuss the afore-noted relevant
Patna High Court CWJC No.6500 of 2026 dt.29-04-2026
5/9
provisions determining the maximum and minimum age for
appearing in the Bihar Judicial Service Competitive
Examination.
The Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch)
(Recruitment) Rules, 1955 has been duly framed and notified in
the official Gazette on 22nd of August, 1955, in exercise of the
powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of India and
amended from time to time after consultation with the High
Court of Judicature at Patna and the Bihar Public Service
Commission. The rules made therein regulates the recruitment
of Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch). Rule 4 of Rules, 1955
mandates that the Commission shall announce in each year in
such manner as they think fit, the number of vacancies to be
filled in that year by direct recruitment on the results of a
competitive examination and shall invite applications from
candidates eligible for appointment under these rules. 3rd
proviso to Rule 4 provided that if common competitive
examination is being conducted for particular year or years as a
special case, the applicant shall be entitled to relaxation of upper
age limit, provided such applicant was eligible in that particular
recruitment year for which the common competitive
examination is being conducted. Further, Rule 6(a) of Rules,
Patna High Court CWJC No.6500 of 2026 dt.29-04-2026
6/9
1955 duly substituted through the amended notification no.
7733 dated 03.10.2000 read with further amendment
notification no. 17283 dated 28.12.2016 reads as under :-
"6. A candidate may be of either sex and
must -
(a) Be his age should be under 35 years
and over 22 years on the 1st day of
August in the preceding year in which the
examination is held.
Provided that a candidate
belonging to a reserved category
including women orthopedically disabled
category must be under 40 years and
over 22 years of age on the said date.
Provided further that, no
candidate who does not belong to
reserved category including women and
orthopedically disabled category, shall
be allowed to take more than five
chances at the examination."
7. After careful perusal of Rule 6(a) as noted
hereinabove, it is manifest that the cut-off date for minimum and
maximum age will be first day of August of the preceding year
in which the examination was conducted. The materials,
specially the copies of two previous advertisements which have
been brought on record, further suggest that the last examination
of 32nd Bihar Judicial Service Competitive Examination was
conducted under Advertisement No. 23/2023 wherein the
maximum age was fixed as forty years for unreserved female
Patna High Court CWJC No.6500 of 2026 dt.29-04-2026
7/9
category and the cut-off date was fixed as 01.08.2019. Similarly,
in the previous advertisement for holding 31st Bihar Judicial
Service Competitive Examination through Advertisement No.
04/2020, the maximum age for unreserved female category was
fixed at forty years and the cut-off date was 01.08.2018. After
careful consideration of the fixation of cut-off date, in all the
three advertisements, we are of the opinion that the same has
been done in complete consonance with Rule 6(a) of Rules,
1955 which clearly mandate that the maximum age will be 1 st
day of August of the preceding year in which the examination is
held. Since prior to the issuance of the Advertisement No. 23/2023
the earlier examination was conducted under Advertisement No.
04/2020, hence the maximum age limit in the Advertisement No.
23/2023 has been prescribed as 01.08.2019 and similarly in the
present advertisement, in question, bearing no. 12/2026, the last
examination was conducted in the year 2023, hence the cut-off
date for maximum age of forty years has been rightly fixed at
01.08.2022.
8. This Court further finds substance in the
submissions advanced by Mr. Piyush Lall, learned Advocate for
the Patna High Court that the identical issue has been clarified
by the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ram Milan
Patna High Court CWJC No.6500 of 2026 dt.29-04-2026
8/9
Thakur (supra) wherein the Court while highlighting the
mandate of Rule 6(a) of the Rules, 1955 has negated the claim
of the writ petitioners, who have approached this Court seeking
identical reliefs for quashing of Clause 3 of Advertisement No.
04/2020. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court has also referred
to ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Ami
Lal Bhat -Vrs.- State of Rajasthan and Ors.; (1997) 6 Supreme
Court Cases 614 that the issue with regard to fixation of a cut-
off date for determining the maximum or minimum age is in the
discretion of the Rule-making Authority or the employer as the
case may be. The cut-off date cannot be fixed with a
mathematical precision and in such a manner as would avoid
hardship in all conceivable cases. As soon as a cut-off date is
fixed, there will be some persons who fall on the right side of
the cut-off date and some persons who will fall on the wrong
side of the cut-off date, that cannot make the cut-off date, per se,
arbitrary unless the cut-off date is so wide off the mark as to
make it wholly unreasonable. Hardship of candidates will not
make statutory provision illegal, capricious and arbitrary.
9. In view of the discussions, aforenoted and the
reliance placed by the learned Senior Advocate for the
petitioner, upon the letter no. 212 dated 23.01.2006 issued by
Patna High Court CWJC No.6500 of 2026 dt.29-04-2026
9/9
the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms,
Government of Bihar, in the opinion of this Court, shall not be
interpreted in any other manner, except in consonance with
Rules, 1955, specially Rule 6(a) thereof. Any interpretation of
the letter dated 23.01.2006 contrary to the statutory rule is not
permissible. The captioned advertisement, especially clause 3
thereof fixing the maximum age limit and its cut-off date is in
conformity with the prescription of rules, noted hereinabove.
10. Accordingly we find the writ petition sans any
merit, fit to be dismissed.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
(Harish Kumar, J)
supratim/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 04.05.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…