High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Pramod Kumar vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 13 September, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Pramod Kumar vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 13 September, 2010
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                CWJC No.3411 of 2010
         1. PRAMOD KUMAR S/O SHRI NAGESHWAR SINGH R/O VILL.-
         DAULATPUR GANDHI TOLA, P.S. GAURICHAK, DISTT.- PATNA
                               Versus
         1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY (HOME)
         POLICE DEPTT., OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA
         2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA
         3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, PATNA
         4. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, PATNA
         5. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE HUMAN RIGHTS,
         BIHAR, PATNA
         6. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CUM CHAIRMAN,
         PATNA RAIL POLICE SELECTION BOARD, PATNA
         7. CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATNA
         8. SUPERINTENDENT OF RAIL POLICE, PATNA
                                       -----------

2. 13.9.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

the State.

The issue relates to grant of five additional

marks based on the NCCB certificate for selection on the

post of Constable.

Strong reliance has been placed on an order

of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 16285 of 2007, affirmed in

L.P.A. No. 821 of 2008 and analogous cases.

Counsel for the State very fairly submits that

if the petitioner was similarly situated on facts, he is

entitled to the same treatment.

The application is disposed in terms of the

aforesaid orders of this Court for examination of the

claims of the petitioner for similarity on facts and a

reasoned and speaking order be passed within a

maximum period of three months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order.

If the respondent no. 3 proposes to hold that

the petitioner is not similarly situated, they are required

to disclose the reasons to him, grant him a personal

hearing and then pass a reasoned and speaking order on

the issue of distinction to facilitate judicial review, should

the need arise.

The writ application stands disposed.

P. Kumar                                               ( Navin Sinha, J.)