Patna High Court
Anand VermaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that the petitioner’s CITS certificate in Electrician & Wireman does not satisfy the specific trade qualification required for the post of Trade Workshop Instructor under Advertisement No. 52/2023, and therefore no relief is warranted.
Summary
The petitioner, Anand Verma, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Bihar Technical Service Commission to consider his candidature and grant him 30% grace marks for a CITS certificate for the post of Trade Workshop Instructor under Advertisement No. 52/2023. He argued that his CITS certificate and a government memorandum on trade mappings should be accepted, entitling him to the required marks and selection. The Commission contended that only candidates with a CITS certificate in the specific trade of Engineering Drawing/Workshop Calculation and Science are eligible for the grace marks, and the petitioner’s certificate is in Electrician & Wireman, which pertains to a different advertisement. The court examined the petitioner’s marks, the cut‑off, and the trade qualifications, concluding that the petitioner’s certificate does not match the trade required by the advertisement. Consequently, the court found no basis to grant any relief and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner’s CITS certificate in Electrician & Wireman satisfies the trade qualification required for the post under Advertisement No. 52/2023.
- Whether the MSDE/DGT guidelines on CITS‑CTS mapping are applicable to the specific advertisement.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a 30% grace mark for holding a CITS certificate.
- Whether the court can direct the Commission to keep a seat vacant or appoint the petitioner.
Subjects
- Public Service Commission
- Trade Instructor
- CITS certificate
- eligibility
- mandamus
- appointment
- advertisement
- selection process
- government recruitment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8647 of 2025
======================================================
Anand Verma son of Shambhu Prasad Verma, r/o Kali Bajar Hilsa, P.S. Hilsa
and District-Nalanda, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Labour Resources Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Labour Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Labour Commissioner, Labour Resources Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Employment and Training, Labour Resources Depatment,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Bihar Technical Service Commission through the Secretary, 19 Harding
Road, Patna-800001.
6. The Chairman, Bihar Technical Service Commission through the Secretary,
19 Harding Road, Patna-800001.
7. The Secretary, Bihar Technical Service Commission through the Secretary,
19 Harding Road, Patna-800001.
8. The Controller of Examination, Bihar Technical Service Commission
through the Secretary, 19 Harding Road, Patna-800001.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Kant, Advocate
Mr. Subhash Kr. Tiwary, Adv.
Mr. Navin Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Karnika, Adv.
Ms. Sristi Kumari, Adv.
Mr. Sudhanshu Prakash, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, AC to Ex-GA-9
For the B.T.S.C. : Mr. Nikesh Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Praveen Tiwary, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Bihar
Technical Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as
‘Commission’).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CWJC No.8647 of 2025(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/7
the petitioner has filed a rejoinder to the counter affidavit
through online mode. He further submits that, due to
paucity of time, he could not file the hard copy of the same
before the Registry and seeks permission for the same to be
accepted in Court.
3. Permission, as prayed for, is granted.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the present writ petition has been filed for the following
reliefs:-
I. For issuance of an order,
direction or a writ of mandamus102219
for directing the respondent Bihar
Technical Service Commission to
consider the candidature of the petitioner
for appointment to the post of Trade
Workshop Instructor (Engineering
Drawing/ Calculation and Science)
against advertisement number 52/2023
issued on 14.09.2023 by the respondent
Commission.
II. For issuance of an order,
direction or a writ of mandamus for
direction the respondents to appoint the
petitioner to the post of Trade Instructor
after granting petitioner 30 marks grace,
Patna High Court CWJC No.8647 of 2025(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/7
as per the rules and appoint the petitioner
along with all consequential benefits
including the continuity of service
seniority etc.
III. For issuance of an order,
direction or an appropriate for directing
the respondent authorities to keep one
seat vacant in the general category
against advertisement number 52/2023
dated 14.09.2023 during the pendency of
the present writ application.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that the CITS certificate issued to the petitioner has
not been considered, despite the fact that the petitioner
secured marks higher than the cut-off, however, his
selection has not been made. He submits that, as per the
advertisement, a one-year Craft Instructor Training Scheme
(CITS) certificate is required, which the petitioner has
already annexed as Annexure P/2 series, but the same has
not been considered by the Commission, resulting in non-
selection of the petitioner.
6. Counsel further submits that, in reply to the
counter-affidavit, a rejoinder has been filed wherein a
communication issued by MSDE (DGT)-19/07/2020-CD
Patna High Court CWJC No.8647 of 2025(2) dt.28-04-2026
4/7
E(34744), Government of India, dated 30.06.2023, has been
annexed, in which the eligibility qualifications for the
category of Trade Instructor have been specified. He
submits that the said guidelines issued by the Government
of India are applicable to the case of the petitioner.
7. He further submits that, in Column 55, i.e.,
“Reading of Drawing and Arithmetic”, all engineering
group of trades are covered. It is also submitted that the
CTS-CITS mapping list, contained in Annexure-1 of the
said Office Memorandum, has been completely ignored by
the Commission.
8. Accordingly, it is submitted that the said
memorandum ought to be given due consideration and the
CITS certificate of the petitioner be directed to be accepted,
so that the name of the petitioner may be included in the
final select list of candidates prepared by the Commission.
9. Learned counsel for the Commission, on the
other hand, submits that Clauses 1 and 3 of the
Advertisement (Annexure-1) are clear and indicative of the
fact that only those candidates who possess a CITS
certificate in the concerned and relevant trade are entitled to
Patna High Court CWJC No.8647 of 2025(2) dt.28-04-2026
5/7
the benefit of the said 30% marks on the basis of such
certificate.
10. He further submits that, upon perusal of
Annexure P/2, the trade certificate issued to the petitioner
indicates that the petitioner possesses a CITS certificate in
Electrician & Wireman trades, which were relevant for
Advertisement No. 46 of 2023 and not for the present
Advertisement No. 52 of 2023.
11. Counsel further submits that, as per Annexure-
1 to Advertisement No. 52 of 2023, the trade certificates in
Engineering Drawing and Workshop Calculation and
Science are the relevant qualifications
12. In this background, it is submitted that the
petitioner is not entitled to any relief.
13. Upon going through the pleadings, it transpires
to this Court that the petitioner has secured 45.9114 marks,
whereas the cut-off marks for the BC category are 50.9583.
However, due to non-consideration of the proper CITS
certificate, the benefit of 30% marks on account of the
CITS qualification has not been granted to the petitioner,
Patna High Court CWJC No.8647 of 2025(2) dt.28-04-2026
6/7
and for this reason, the petitioner could not be selected.
14. It also transpires to this Court from Annexure
P/2 that the trade of the petitioner is Electrician & Wireman,
whereas the post under Advertisement No. 52 of 2023
pertains to Engineering Drawing/Workshop Calculation and
Science.
15. In the rejoinder to the counter-affidavit filed
by the petitioner, this Court notes that the letter of the
Directorate General of Training (DGT), Government of
India, vide letter No. MSDE (DGT)-02/01/(03)/2019-CD,
dated 11.11.2019, is applicable but from Annexure-1 of the
Office Memorandum (Annexure-P11 to the rejoinder to the
counter affidavit), which indicates the names of CITS trades
and applicable CTS trades, the Column No. 55, i.e.,
“Reading of Drawing and Arithmetic”, where the applicable
CTS trade according to the petitioner is shown as “all
Engineering group of trades” is not applicable in the
present case as from the Advertisement the post is
Engineering Drawing/Workshop Calculation and Science
which is different from the Reading of Drawing and
Arithmetic.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8647 of 2025(2) dt.28-04-2026
7/7
16. Similarly, upon perusal of Annexure P/2, this
Court is of the firm view that the trade of the petitioner is
Electrician and Wireman, whereas the requirement under
Advertisement No. 52 of 2023 is Engineering
Drawing/Workshop Calculation and Science, which are
quite different.
17. In this background, this Court finds no case in
favour of the petitioner, and accordingly, the present writ
petition stands dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U
Checking your session…