Bihar Staff Selection Commission & Anr. vs Himal Kumari & Anr. Etc.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

16 July 2024

Case No.

Civil Appeal Nos. 7815-7816 of 2024

Result

Dismissed

Bench

Vikram Nath, Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale

Citation

[2024] 7 S.C.R. 970 : 2024 INSC 531

Acts & Sections

Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and… Constitution

Issue for consideration

The issue pertains to the selection and appointment to the post of City Manager under the Urban Development and Housing Department, Govt. of Bihar. The said post is governed by the Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2014, which were framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote

Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2014 – Rule 5 and Rule 11 – Appellants issued an advertisement for appointment to posts of City Managers in the State of Bihar – Respondent no. 1 achieved

22.575 marks out of 70 in the written examination – Appellants declared her unsuccessful as she did not obtain the minimum qualifying marks of 32% as she had secured 22.5 marks in the written test and she had no prior work experience, she achieved 0 marks out of 30 for the work experience – In totality, she has achieved 22.5 marks out of 100, below the minimum requirement of 32% – Aggrieved, Respondent no.1 filed writ petition, which was allowed by the Single Judge of the High Court – The Division Bench upheld the decision of the Single Judge of the High Court – Correctness:

Held: A conjoint reading of the Rules, 2014 in particular rules

5 and 11, with the advertisement and giving it a pragmatic and harmonious construction, what emerges is that 32% in the written examination would make a candidate eligible and qualified to be placed in the consideration zone – However, the merit list would be prepared after taking into consideration the marks obtained on account of experience – Thus, a candidate similar to Respondent no.1 would be eligible to be considered for appointment having scored 32% marks (22.5 marks out of 70) in the written examination even though having no experience – The required minimum qualifying marks are concerned with marks obtained in the written test only, as is evident from the Rules 2014 as also the advertisement, and it has no relevance so far as for the final preparation of the merit list – The conduct of the appellants by not including respondent no.1 in the merit list is not in consonance with the said advertisement – Respondent no. 1 received 22.5 marks out of 70, 32.14 per cent, above the minimum qualifying marks of 32 per cent as per the advertisement – Therefore, the appellants were not right by denying her a place on the merit list – Impugned judgement does not warrant any interference. [Paras 16, 17, 21]

Judgment Vikram Nath, J. 1. Leave Granted 2. The appeals under consideration challenges the validity of the judgment dated 20 December 2022 (Corrected on 22 February 2023) passed by the Patna High Court in L.P.A. No’s 412 and 109 of 2021 arising out of C.W.J.C. No. 7051/2020, whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed both the appeals and refused to interfere with the judgment and order dated 15.10.2020 passed by the Single Judge. 3. The issue pertains to the selection and appointment to the post of City Manager under the Urban Development and Housing Department, Govt.of Bihar.

View Subscription Plans →