Patna High Court
Saiyad Ali AnsariversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The petitioner did not meet the required cutoff marks and the vacancy was lawfully carried forward, so the court dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Saiyad Ali Ansari, filed a writ petition seeking the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) to publish his result and accept his appointment as Assistant Prosecution Officer (APO) under the Extremely Backward Class (EBC) category for Advertisement No. 42 of 2011. He claimed that a vacancy arose because another candidate, Rajesh Kumar, joined a similar post under Advertisement No. 41, leaving an EBC seat vacant, and that his score of 498 marks was the highest among remaining EBC candidates. The State and BPSC contended that the petitioner’s score was below the required cutoff of 503 marks, and that the unfilled vacancy was lawfully carried forward to Advertisement No. 1 of 2020 as per Resolution Memo No. 2374 dated 16‑06‑2017. The court examined the reservation‑wise vacancy list, the cutoff marks, and the applicable resolution governing vacant seats. Finding that the petitioner did not meet the qualifying marks and that the vacancy had been appropriately carried forward, the court concluded that there was no ground for judicial interference and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the BPSC is required to publish the petitioner’s result and accept his joining despite his marks being below the cutoff for the EBC category.
- Whether a vacancy arising from non‑joining under Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 can be carried forward to a later advertisement under the applicable resolution.
- Whether the court can intervene in the BPSC’s selection process and vacancy‑filling policy.
Subjects
- reservation
- EBC
- Bihar Public Service Commission
- vacancy
- non‑joining
- writ petition
- selection process
- cutoff marks
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7137 of 2018
======================================================
Saiyad Ali Ansari S/o Salamatula Ansari, Resident of Village- Murlipur, P.O.-
Baddi, P.S.Block- Shivsagar, District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home,
Govt. of Bihat, Patna
2. The Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15, Jawaharlal Nehru
Marg Bailey Road, Patna- 80000
3. The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg
Bailey Road, Patna- 800001.
4. The Director, The Directorate of Prosecution, Home Department, Patna Old
Secretariat, Govt. of Bihar
5. The Principal Secretary, General Administrative Department, Old
Secretariat, Govt. of Bihar at Patna
6. Rajesh Kumar, S/o Rameshwar Prasad, Resident of Village- Malbigha, P.O.-
Kaliachak, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda, Pin- 801302.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kuber Pathak, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pratik Kumar, AC to GA 11
For the BPSC : Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 23-04-2026
Heard Mr. Kuber pathak, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Pratik Kumar, learned AC to GA-11 and Mr.
Sanjay pandey, learned counsel for the Bihar Public Service
Commission (hereinafter referred as "BPSC").
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
"I. For directing the respondent BPSC and its
officials to publish the result of the petitioner being a
Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2018 dt.23-04-2026
2/7
successful candidate against post of Asst. Prosecution
Officer, which is still vacant due to non-joining of a
successful candidate on the post of Asst. Prosecution
Officer, in post published vide advertisement No. 42
of 2011, issued from Home Department, Govt. of
Bihar.
II. For directing the respondents to accept the
joining of petitioner being successful candidate
against the post of Asst. Prosecution Officer, Home
Department Govt. of Bihar against Adv. 42 of 2011.
III. For granting any other relief or reliefs for which
the petitioner is entitled for."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner summits that
pursuant to Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 for the post of
Assistant Prosecution Officer, Government of Bihar (hereinafter
referred as "APO"). The petitioner had appeared and cleared the
written test and appeared for the interview. Learned counsel for
the petitioner summits that it is pertinent to mention here that
the said Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 was only for the vacancy
of 80 seats and total number of candidates participated in the
interview were only 80. Out of 80 seats, only 75 candidates
have finally selected. The final result was published on 14-06-
2017 (Annexure-3). Learned counsel for the petitioner further
summits that in the said advertisement, 14 seats have been
reserved for the post of Extremely Backward Class, and against
these 14 seats, finally 14 candidates have been declared
successful on 14-06-2017 for the post in question. He further
Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2018 dt.23-04-2026
3/7
summits, that private respondent namely Rajesh Kumar has also
appeared in the said examination for the post in question
conducted by the BPSC against Advertisement No. 41 of 2011
and he also appeared for the examination of BPSC for the post
in question against Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 and he was
declared successful in both the examination i.e, Advertisement
No. 41 of 2011 and Advertisement No. 42 of 2011. Learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that the said Rajesh Kumar
has joined the post in question against the selection under the
extremely backward class towards Advertisement No. 41 of
2011 and due to his joining in Advertisement No. 41 of 2011,
one post advertised in the Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 became
vacant. He further submits that the petitioner and private
respondent both belong to Extremely Backward Class and due
to which respondent no. 6 joined the post in Advertisement No.
41 of 2011 was against EBC category. As a result, one post of
the EBC category became vacant in vacancy existed towards
Advertisement No. 42 of 2011. The said private respondent has
obtained total 503 marks in Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 and
petitioner got 498 marks and he is the only candidate left in
EBC category.
4. Learned counsel for the state as well as learned
Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2018 dt.23-04-2026
4/7
counsel for the BPSC have filed their respective counter
affidavit as well as supplementary counter affidavit stating
therein that the petitioner had applied for the advertisement in
question for the post of Assistant Prosecution Officer. The roster
of reservation wise vacancy was General (01)-40, SC (02)-14,
ST (03)-00, EBC(04)-14, BC (05)-10 and BCL (06)-02 total- 80
and out of total 80 posts/vacancies, 3% were admissible for the
disabled candidates. Petitioner has applied under the EBC (04)
category and he could not be declared successful finally because
petitioner has secured only 498 marks which is less than cut off
marks i.e., 503 of his reserved category i.e., EBC(04). The final
result was published on 14-06-2017 and five vacancies (BC-3
& BCL-2) remained vacant due to unavailability of the suitable
candidates and now the selection process is over. In fact the
petitioner had applied for Advertisement No. 39 of 2009,
Advertisement No. 41 of 2011 and Advertisement No. 42 of
2011 but he could not be finally selected and so far as the
Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 is concerned (subject
matter of the writ petition), the petitioner did not find
any place in the selection list. Learned counsel for the BPSC
further summits that so far as the vacancy of the seat due to non-
joining is concerned, there is resolution bearing Memo No. 2374
Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2018 dt.23-04-2026
5/7
dated 16-06-2017 issued by the Department of Personnel &
Administrative Reform, Government of Bihar whereby as per
Clause-3 (16), it provides that due to non-joining within the
stipulated time or due to any reasons, vacant seat would be
carried forward for next requisition/advertisement. He further
submits that due to Resolution dated 16-07-2007, there is no
provision for keeping the vacant seat as it is carried forward to
next requisition/advertisement.
5. Learned counsel for the BPSC further summits that
a letter no. 53 dated 04-04-2005 of BPSC was sent to the
Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Home, Bihar for
informing the Commission whether the post in question was
carried forward to the next advertisement or not. He further
summits that vide letter No. 900 dated 09-04-2025 of the
Department of Home, Directorate of Prosecution, Government
of Bihar as received by the BPSC, the Government of Bihar has
informed that post remained vacant in Advertisement No. 42 of
2011 (subject matter of the writ petition) had been carried
forward to the next vacancy through Advertisement No. 1 of
2020. The letter dated 09.04.2025 is reproduced hereinbelow:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2018 dt.23-04-2026
6/7
Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2018 dt.23-04-2026
7/7
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material available on record, it appears that the
petitioner had applied for the post in question and he has
obtained only 498 marks (EBC-04) and last selected candidate
has obtained 503 marks (EBC-04) which is higher than that of
petitioner. It is also clear that the vacancy which was not filled
in the Advertisement No. 42 of 2011 is carried forward in the
next vacancy i.e., Advertisement No. 1 of 2020 in terms of
resolution bearing Memo No. 2374 dated 16-06-2017 and now
the selection process is over and no vacancy is remained vacant.
7. In view of the aforesaid, no case is made out for
interference of this Court.
8. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 01.05.2026
Transmission Date N.A.
Checking your session…