Patna High Court
Sujit Kumar Bharti,versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that due to the unexplained inordinate delay, the writ petition is devoid of merit and must be dismissed.
Summary
Sujit Kumar Bharti applied for a clerk position in the subordinate courts of Bihar, with the selection process concluding in 2015. Ten years later, in 2025, he filed a writ petition seeking disclosure of his interview marks and an order directing his appointment. The respondents argued that the petition was filed after an inordinate delay. The Patna High Court examined the facts, noted the unexplained ten‑year gap, and concluded that such delay defeats the petitioner's claim. Consequently, the court found the petition devoid of merit and dismissed it without granting any relief.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition seeking disclosure of interview marks and appointment can be entertained after a ten‑year delay.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for appointment as clerk in the subordinate courts.
Subjects
- writ petition
- delay
- public service recruitment
- disclosure of marks
- appointment
- administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8278 of 2025
======================================================
Sujit Kumar Bharti, Son of Late Ramdeo Prasad, Resident of Village-
Kafarpur, P.O.- Berka, P.S. Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
2. The Secretary, Law Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
3. The Patna High Court Through The Registrar General, Patna High Court,
Patna
4. The Co-ordination Committee Through the Convener-cum-District and
Sessions Judge, Patna
5. The Convener-cum-District and Sessions Judge, Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gaurav Govind, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (04)
For the PHC : Mr. Piyush Lal, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 21-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,
learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel
appearing for the respondent nos. 3 to 5.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief/s :-
“(i) For issuance of appropriate
writ/writs/order/orders commanding the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8278 of 2025(2) dt.21-04-2026
2/3
respondents to reveal the marks obtained by
the petitioner in the interview conducted by the
respondents for appointment on the post of
Clerk in the Sub-ordinate Courts of Bihar.
(ii) For issuance of appropriate
writ/writs/order/orders commanding the
respondents to appoint the petitioner on the
post of clerk.
(iii) For issuance of any other
writ/writs/order/orders or direction to which
the petitioner may be found entitled to in the
facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent
Nos. 3 to 5 has raised a preliminary objection, submitting that as
per the petitioner’s own pleadings, the selection process was
completed in the year 2015. It is further contended that after an
inordinate delay of about ten years, the petitioner has filed the
present writ petition in the year 2025, seeking disclosure of the
marks obtained by him in the interview.
4. This Court, upon perusal of the statement made in
paragraph 15 of the writ petition, notes that the selection process
pursuant to the advertisement dated 06.02.2011 was concluded
in the year 2015. The petitioner has, for the first time in the year
2025, sought disclosure of the marks obtained in the interview.
5. In view of such unexplained and inordinate delay,
Patna High Court CWJC No.8278 of 2025(2) dt.21-04-2026
3/3
this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter.
6. Accordingly, the present writ petition, being devoid
of merit, stands dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
U
Checking your session…