Patna High Court

Hari Shankar KumarversusBihar State University Service Commission,

Decided: 13 March 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: THE CHIEF JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

Holding

The selection process must be conducted strictly in accordance with the advertisement, and the rejection of the appellant’s application for not submitting a Registrar‑signed five‑point Ph.D. certificate within the prescribed deadline was lawful.

Summary

The petitioner Hari Shankar Kumar applied for the post of Assistant Professor (History) and submitted a five‑point Ph.D. certificate signed by the Vice‑Chancellor, which the Bihar State University Service Commission rejected on the ground that the advertisement required the certificate to be signed by the Registrar. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking quashing of the rejection, arguing that the Vice‑Chancellor was a competent authority under the 2016 Gazette Notification and that the certificate was later re‑certified by the Registrar. The Commission contended that the advertisement and UGC regulations expressly mandated Registrar certification and that no extension was granted for late submission. The Court examined the terms of Advertisement No. AP‑HIST‑08/20‑21, relevant UGC regulations, and precedents emphasizing strict compliance with advertised deadlines. It held that the certificate signed by the Vice‑Chancellor did not satisfy the statutory requirement and that the late submission could not be entertained absent a valid extension. Consequently, the Court dismissed the intra‑court appeal, finding no illegality in the Single Judge’s order.

Issues considered

The five‑point Ph.D. certificate must be signed by the Registrar as per the advertisement and UGC regulations, or can a Vice‑Chancellor's signature satisfy the requirement?
Whether the Commission may reject an application for failure to submit the Registrar‑signed certificate within the stipulated deadline despite later submission.
Whether the selection process can be relaxed or extended without explicit authority in the advertisement or governing rules.
Whether the appellant is entitled to relief under writ jurisdiction for alleged arbitrariness in the rejection.

Subjects

Assistant Professor recruitment
five‑point Ph.D. certificate
selection process compliance
advertisement terms
UGC regulations
public service appointment
Article 14 equality
writ jurisdiction

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.595 of 2025
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18284 of 2024
======================================================
Hari Shankar Kumar, Son of Ram Naresh Sharma, Resident of
Village/Mohalla Narma, P.S. Hathauri, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. Bihar State University Service Commission, 8th Floor, Bihar School
Examination Board, Academic Building, Buddha Marg Patna - 800001
through its Secretary.
2. The Secretary, Bihar State University Service Commission, 8th Floor, Bihar
School Examination Board, Academic Building, Buddha Marg, Patna -
800001.
3. Jay Prakash University, Rahul Sanksritayan Nagar, Chapra through its
Registrar.
4. The Vice Chancellor, Jay Prakash University, Rahul Sanskritayan Nagar,
Chapra.
5. The Registrar, Jay Prakash University, Rahul Sanksritayan Nagar, Chapra.
6. Anil Kumar Son of Jhulan Singh, Resident of Village - Mohalla - Rampur
Noornagar, P.O. Kanhi, P.S. - Jalalpur, District- Saran.
7. Vidya Nand Ram Son of Gauri Ram, Resident of Village/Mohalla - Bargaon,
P.O. Bargaon, P.S. - Mairwa, District - Siwan.
... ... Respondents

======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Amit Anand, Advocate
For the J.P. Unv. : Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, Advocate
Mr. Chandan Kumar, Advocate
For the B.S.U.S.C. : Mr. Tuhin Shankar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR)

Date : 13-03-2026

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective

parties.

2. The challenge in the present intra-court appeal is
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
2/16

made to an order/judgment dated 21.03.2025 passed by the

learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.18284 of 2024, whereby

the learned Court, having found no merit in the writ petition,

dismissed the same.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present

appeal are that the petitioner, along with other eligible

candidates submitted their applications for appointment to the

post of Assistant Professor in the subject of History, pursuant to

Advertisement No.AP-HIST-08/20-21. A corrigendum to the

said advertisement was subsequently issued by the Commission

on 02.12.2020, extending the last date for submission of online

applications through the Commission’s web portal up to

10.12.2020 and for receipt of the downloaded hard copy of the

online application, along with photocopies of all requisite

documents and degree certificates, up to 30.12.2020 till 5:00

PM. The petitioner, along with others, duly submitted their

online application form, uploaded all necessary documents, and

thereafter dispatched the hard copy of the application along with

the uploaded documents through speed post within the

stipulated time.

4. Upon scrutiny of the applications, the Commission

issued a public notice dated 14.10.2024, duly uploaded on its

official website, informing candidates about deficiencies found
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
3/16

in certain applications and granting them an opportunity to

rectify the same within the prescribed period. The petitioner’s

application was rejected on the ground that the five-point Ph.D.

certificate submitted by him had not been issued by the

competent authority.

5. Aggrieved by the said decision, the petitioner

(appellant herein) along with two other candidates filed a writ

petition bearing C.W.J.C. No.18284 of 2024 seeking quashing

of the Commission’s decision whereby their applications had

been rejected.

6. So far as petitioner no.3 (Vidya Nand Ram) in

C.W.J.C. No.18284 of 2024 is concerned, he had submitted the

five-point Ph.D. certificate issued by the Dean of the concerned

University, which was found to be in conformity with

Advertisement No. AP-HIST-08/20-21. Consequently, he was

issued an interview letter, participated in the selection process,

and his grievance stood redressed.

7. However, petitioner no. 1, Hari Shankar Kumar (the

appellant herein), and petitioner no. 2, Anil Kumar, contended

before the learned Single Judge that in terms of Clause 4.1(ii) of

the advertisement, a candidate seeking consideration for his/her

appointment to the post of Assistant Professor (History) was
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
4/16

required to submit a five-point Ph.D. certificate duly signed by

the Registrar/Dean of the concerned University on or before

10.12.2020. They asserted that they had submitted their five-

point Ph.D. certificates prior to the cut-off date; however, their

candidature was rejected solely on the ground that the

certificates had been issued under the signature of the Vice-

Chancellor of the University.

8. Notwithstanding the public notice informing the

candidate(s) to make necessary correction, petitioner nos. 1

(appellant) and 2, in C.W.J.C. No.18284 of 2024, were not

permitted to submit fresh five-point Ph.D. certificates duly

signed by the Registrar, even though the certificates issued by

the Vice-Chancellor were not accepted as being in compliance

with the advertisement.

9. Moreover, petitioners no.1 and 2 (in C.W.J.C.

No.18284 of 2024), upon coming to know of the rejection of

their applications, immediately approached the University and

obtained five-point Ph.D. certificates duly signed by the

Registrar, which they submitted before the respondent-

Commission. Hence, there was no substantive deficiency in

their qualifications; nevertheless, they were not allowed to

participate in the interview process.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
5/16

10. The non-consideration of five-point Ph.D.

certificates of petitioners no. 1 and 2 (in C.W.J.C. No.18284 of

2024), issued by the Vice-Chancellor of the University, is said to

be an arbitrary exercise of power by the respondent-

Commission. The action of the Commission was high-handed

and whimsical, resulting in serious civil consequences,

including the loss of a valuable opportunity to be appointed as

Assistant Professor in a constituent college; was the contention

of the learned counsel for the petitioners before the learned

Single Judge.

11. On the contrary, the University Service

Commission vigorously refuted the petitioners’ contentions and

submitted that petitioners no.1 and 2 had admittedly failed to

submit the five-point Ph.D. certificates in the manner prescribed

under the advertisement prior to the cut-off date. Their

applications, being in breach of the terms and conditions of

Advertisement No. AP-HIST-08/20-21, were therefore rightly

rejected. It was further submitted that Clause 7 of the impugned

order clearly stipulates that candidates whose applications were

rejected on the ground of non-submission of the five-point

Ph.D. certificate duly signed by the Registrar of the concerned

University would not be granted any further opportunity to

produce the same.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
6/16

12. The Commission also placed reliance on the

judgment rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Dr.

Alok Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar & Ors., [C.W.J.C. No.

10670 of 2024] and other analogous case, wherein the Court, in

similar factual circumstances, declined to interfere on the

ground that there was no provision for relaxation of the terms

and conditions of the advertisement or the relevant rules. The

learned Single Judge, upon hearing the parties and finding merit

in the submissions advanced on behalf of the Commission,

dismissed the writ petition. The said order/judgment is under

challenge in the present appeal.

13. The learned Advocate for the appellant while

questioning the legality of the order of the judgement under

appeal, has submitted that pursuant to the Gazette Notification

dated 4th May 2016, Clause 3.3.1 of the relevant Regulations

mandates that the five-point certificate be certified by the Vice-

Chancellor/Pro Vice-Chancellor/Dean (Academic Affairs)/Dean

(University Instructions). In the present case, the five-point

Ph.D. certificate was duly issued and certified by the Vice-

Chancellor of the concerned University in favour of the writ

petitioner–appellant, and the same was uploaded along with the

application form within the prescribed time. It is contended that

the Vice-Chancellor being the competent authority under the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
7/16

Regulations, the non-acceptance of the said certificate and the

consequent rejection of the appellant’s candidature is wholly

arbitrary and unsustainable in law. It is further submitted that, in

any event, the certificate was subsequently duly certified by the

Registrar of the University in light of the amended Regulations

dated 18th July 2018 and thereby removed the alleged procedural

deficiency, if any.

14. The learned Advocate for the appellant further

contended that in somewhat similar circumstances, the teaching

experience of another candidate for appointment to the post of

Assistant Professor in the Department of Commerce was

rejected solely on the ground that the experience certificate had

not been countersigned by the Registrar of the University. In

that context, the learned Division Bench of this Court in

Anuradha Singh v. The Bihar State University Service

Commission & Ors. [L.P.A. No.109 of 2025], held that not

awarding any marks to the appellant on the basis of teaching

experience only on the ground that it was not countersigned by

the Registrar would be unfair and would not be in consonance

with the purposive reading of the Statute as also of the

advertisement. It is lastly contended that the genuineness of

five-point certificate issued in favour of the appellant has never

been questioned by the respondents. In such circumstances, it is
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
8/16

urged that the certificate submitted along with the application

form ought to be treated as valid and in conformity with the

advertisement, and the appellant deserves to be considered for

interview. The order passed by the learned Single Judge in

C.W.J.C. No. 10670 of 2024, is said to be contrary to the ratio

and findings recorded by the learned Division Bench in L.P.A.

No. 109 of 2025.

15. Mr. Tuhin Shankar, the learned Advocate for the

Commission, has supported the order passed by the learned

Single Judge of this Court by placing reliance upon the

decisions in The Bihar State University Service Commission &

Ors. v. Amiya Shekhar & Ors. [L.P.A. No. 653 of 2024], Bihar

State University Service Commission & Anr. v. Alka Kumari

[L.P.A. No.777 of 2024] and Dr. Alok Kumar Singh v. The

State of Bihar & Ors. [C.W.J.C. No.10670 of 2024]. It is

submitted that in the afore-noted cases, the learned Division

Bench as well as the learned Single Judge, placing reliance upon

the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bedanga

Talukdar v. Saifudaullah Khan [(2011) 12 SCC 85] and the

decision rendered by the Full Bench of this Court in Braj

Kishore Prasad v. State of Bihar [1998 (3) PLJR 34], have

held that the selection process must be conducted strictly in

accordance with the procedure stipulated in the advertisement. It
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
9/16

has been further held that no relaxation of the terms and

conditions of the advertisement is permissible unless such

power is expressly reserved in the advertisement itself or under

the rules governing the selection process. Learned counsel for

the Commission, while concluding his submission, further

argued that none of the candidates, whose candidature has been

rejected on the ground that they have not submitted their five-

point Ph.D. certificate duly issued/signed by the Registrar has

been allowed any opportunity to produce the same.

16. We have considered the submissions advanced and

perused the order/judgement passed by the learned Single

Judge; before proceeding further, it would be worth benefiting

to discuss the relevant terms and conditions of the advertisement

in question.

17. After careful perusal and scrutiny of clause 4.1.(ii)

of Advertisement No. AP-HIST-08/20-21, it appears that the

candidates who have not qualified the National Eligibility Test

conducted by the UGC or the CSIR or a similar test accredited

by the UGC can also participate for the post of Assistant

Professor, provided that such a candidate is a holder of the Ph.D.

Degree in accordance with UGC regulations 2009 or 2016 and

the amendments made from time to time as the case may be.

Provided further that the candidates registered for UGC
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
10/16

programmes prior to July 11th, 2009 shall be governed by the

provisions of the then existing ordinance/ bylaws/ regulations of

the institution awarding the degree subject to fulfillment of the

following five conditions:-

(a) The Ph.D. Degree of the
candidate has been awarded in a regular mode;

(b) The Ph.D. Thesis has been
evaluated by at least two external examiners;

(d) The Candidate has published two
research papers from his / her Ph.D. work, out
of which at least one is in a referred journal;

(e) The candidate has presented at least
two papers based on his/her Ph.D. work in
conferences /Seminars sponsored/funded/supported
by the UGC/ICSSR/CSIR or any similar agency.

Further, in terms with the University Grants

Commission Notification dated 18.07.2018, the fulfillment of

these conditions is to be certified by the Registrar or the Dean

(Academic Affairs) of the University concerned, which is

categorically stipulated in the advertisement itself.

18. The case of the appellant, as borne out from the

materials available on record, clearly indicates that the five-

point certificate relating to the Ph.D. degree, purportedly issued
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
11/16

under the signature of the Vice-Chancellor of the University,

was not in conformity with the specific requirements prescribed

under the UGC Regulations dated 18 July 2018. Furthermore,

the five-point certificate relating to the Ph.D. degree, certified

by the Registrar of the University, as now relied upon by the

petitioner–appellant, was submitted much after the stipulated

last date for uploading the online application as well as for filing

the hard copy thereof.

19. Now, it would be apposite to refer to the decision

rendered by the Full Bench of this Court in Braj Kishore

Prasad (supra), wherein the learned Full Bench, in its

penultimate paragraph, observed as follows:-

“26. Having regard to all these
considerations, I hold that:

(a) Where the advertisement specifies
the last date for filing of supporting or other
documents, that date must be given effect to,
and any document received after such date shall
be rejected by the selecting authority.

(b) In appropriate cases where the
selecting authority is of the view that the time
for furnishing of documents should be extended,
it may grant such extension by issuing a public
notice to this effect so that all candidates may
get the benefit of such extension. In the absence
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
12/16

of any such extension granted by the selecting
authority, the date/dates mentioned in the
advertisement should be treated to be the last
date for filing of documents, and no document
shall be accepted thereafter.

(c) No application/document shall be
entertained by the Commission if the same is
filed after the last date specified in the
advertisement, or the extended date notified by
the commission, even if the same is filed before
the finalisation of the select list.

(d) In appropriate cases where this
Court is satisfied that a case of extreme
hardship or injustice has resulted on account of
factors beyond the control of the concerned
candidate, this Court in exercise of its writ
jurisdiction may grant relief in deserving cases.
But in doing so, the Court must be satisfied that
the candidate concerned has acted diligently,
and is not guilty of delay or laches in taking
necessary steps for procurring the requisite
certificates, etc. However, no relief shall be
granted where the requisite certificate is
produced for the first time after the process of
selection is complete and the selecting authority
has made its recommendation.”

20. It would also be worthy to recapitulate the

decision of Bedanga Talukdar (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme

Court, while considering the relevance and binding nature of the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
13/16

terms and conditions stipulated in the advertisement

underscored their significance and held as follows:

“In our opinion, it is too well settled
to need any further reiteration that all
appointments to public office have to be made
in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution
of India. In other words, there must be no
arbitrariness resulting from any undue favour
being shown to any candidate. Therefore, the
selection process has to be conducted strictly in
accordance with the stipulated selection
procedure. Consequently, when a particular
schedule is mentioned in an advertisement, the
same has to be scrupulously maintained. There
cannot be any relaxation in the terms and
conditions of the advertisement unless such a
power is specifically reserved. Such a power
could be reserved in the relevant statutory
rules. Even if power of relaxation is provided in
the rules, it must still be mentioned in the
advertisement. In the absence of such power in
the rules, it could still be provided in the
advertisement. However, the power of
relaxation, if exercised, has to be given due
publicity. This would be necessary to ensure
that those candidates who become eligible due
to the relaxation, are afforded an equal
opportunity to apply and compete. Relaxation
of any condition in advertisement without due
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
14/16

publication would be contrary to the mandate
of equality contained in Articles 14 and 16 of
the Constitution of India..."

21. Now, adverting to the decision rendered by the

learned Division Bench of this Court in Anuradha Singh

(supra), upon which heavy reliance has been placed, admittedly

the observations made therein were confined to the peculiar

facts of the appellant’s case and were not intended to be treated

as a precedent of general application. The learned Division

Bench, while distinguishing the earlier decision rendered in

Amiya Shekhar (supra), took note of the fact that in the said

case the candidate had submitted the requisite certificate at a

highly belated stage, when the selection process had already

progressed substantially. In contrast, in Anuradha Singh

(supra), the selection process in respect of the Department of

Commerce had not commenced as on the relevant date. It would

also be pertinent to take note of the decision of the learned

Division Bench in Amiya Shekhar (supra), wherein it was

emphatically held that marks under the head of teaching/post-

doctoral experience can be awarded only on the basis of a

certificate duly countersigned by the Registrar of the concerned

University.

22. Similarly, in The Bihar State University Service
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
15/16

Commission v. Anurag Kumar Sinha @ Anurag Ambasta

[L.P.A. No. 698 of 2024], the learned Division Bench vide its

judgment dated 24.10.2024, observed that where the experience

certificate was not in consonance with the prescribed

requirements and the candidate had failed to submit the requisite

certificate before the last date of submission of the online

application form without even making any attempt to obtain a

certificate in conformity with the stipulated conditions, the same

could not be entertained thereafter. The Court reiterated that

submission of a teaching experience certificate duly

countersigned by the Registrar beyond the prescribed last date

would not be permissible.

23. Upon careful consideration of the aforesaid

decisions discussed hereinabove, there remains no hesitation in

holding that the selection process must be conducted strictly in

accordance with the procedure stipulated in the advertisement,

unless there exists a specific provision for relaxation of the

terms and conditions, either in the advertisement itself or under

the statutory rules governing the selection process. Once the

candidature of the appellant was found not to be in consonance

with the prescribed terms and conditions of the advertisement in

question, its rejection cannot be said to suffer from any

illegality.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.595 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
16/16

24. Further, the contention of the Commission that no

such candidate has been allowed, whose candidature has been

rejected on account of his failure to submit five-point Ph.D.

certificate signed by the Registrar and this statement has neither

been refuted nor any document/evidence has been brought on

record to make out his claim on parity; rather the instances are

otherwise.

25. In view thereof, this Court finds no perversity and

illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

Accordingly, the present intra-court appeal, being devoid of

merit, stands dismissed.

(Harish Kumar, J)

Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ: I agree.

(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
rohit/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 25.02.2026
Uploading Date 13-03-2026
Transmission Date

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…