BSUSC Must Verify Teaching Experience Certificates Before Awarding Zero Marks To Candidates: Patna High Court

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Ritesh Kumar directed the BSUSC to recalculate the marks of a candidate for the post of Assistant Professor (Philosophy) after considering his teaching experience certificate and to appoint him if, upon recalculation, he secures marks above the final cut-off.

The petitioner had challenged the Commission's decision not to call him for interview pursuant to Advertisement No. 15/2020-21 for appointment of Assistant Professors in Philosophy. He claimed that he was entitled to 91 academic marks, well above the cut-off of 76 marks fixed for BC category candidates, but was nevertheless excluded from the interview process.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner was permitted to appear in the interview pursuant to interim orders. He secured 12 interview marks, but his overall score stood at 86.6, below the final cut-off of 88 fixed for BC category candidates. The petitioner contended that this shortfall resulted from the Commission's refusal to award marks for his teaching experience at H.S. College, Haveli Kharagpur, Munger, from 23 September 2013 to 6 December 2017.

The Commission had awarded marks for the petitioner's teaching experience at one constituent college but refused to grant any marks for the experience at H.S. College on the ground that the experience certificate did not mention a letter or memo number and the date of issuance, although it had been countersigned by the Registrar of the concerned University.

Before the Court, the University produced records showing that the Principal of H.S. College had confirmed the correctness of the petitioner's teaching experience certificate.

Examining Clause 7.2 of the advertisement, the Court noted that candidates were entitled to two marks for each completed year of teaching experience, provided the certificate was countersigned by the Registrar of the concerned University. The advertisement did not stipulate that the certificate should also contain a memo or letter number and date. The Court observed:

“The Commission was under obligation to get it verified, before awarding Zero mark to any candidate, whose certificate did not contain any letter/memo number and date, however was duly counter-signed by the Registrar of the University.”

Holding that the Commission's decision was contrary to its own advertisement, the Court directed it to recalculate the petitioner's marks by taking into account his teaching experience at H.S. College. It further directed that if the petitioner secured marks above the cut-off of 88, he should be appointed against the post that had been kept vacant pursuant to the Court's interim orders. While denying back wages, the Court held that he would be entitled to seniority and all consequential service benefits from the date similarly situated candidates were appointed.

Case Title: Abnish Kumar Arimarden @ Avanish Kumar Arimardan v. State of Bihar and Ors.

Case Number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18526 of 2022

Appearance: Mr. Bindhayachal Singh, Senior Advocate, Mr. Umesh Kumar and Mr. Shubhankar Raj for the Petitioner. Mr. Madhaw Pd. Yadav and Ms. Meera Singh for the Respondents. Mr. Tuhin Shaukar and Mr. Ashhar Mustfa for the University.