Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1588 (PAT)

Ramchandra Prasad v. B. P. S. C.

2009-12-24

NAVIN SINHA

body2009
JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Bihar Public Service Commission. 2. The petitioner at the 26th Bihar Judicial Examination on 7.7.2006 was expelled on allegations of use of unfair means. He is now been denied the right to appear at the Preliminary test of the 27th Bihar Judicial Examination to be held from 30th December, 2009. 3. The submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the duration of debarment for three years has to be reckoned from 7.7.2006. The petitioner therefore became eligible to apply from 7.7.2009. The last date for submission of application for the 27th Bihar Judicial Examination was 3.8.2009 as on that date the petitioner had crossed the limit of debarment. 4. Counsel for the Commission having obtained instruction submits that the petitioner has been dabarred for three years by an order of the Commission dated 27.3.2008 which will end in December, 2009 only. Moreover, the Commission contends that such a person perhaps may not be eligible to appear at the examination for recruitment of personnel to discharge judicial duties. 5. The second submission of the Commission does not appeal to this Court at all. It defies the normal human spirit to learn and improve. The Commission appears to believe in condemning outright and not in permitting a person to reform and improve as a human being. This belief is contrary to science and to the human spirit. The Court rejects this argument. 6. No provisions of the Commission have been placed before this Court with regard to debarment. The contention is that it has been the practice of the Commission to compute the period of three years till the end of the year. The date on which the Commission takes the decision cannot be the relevant date. If that be permitted, it would be giving arbitrary powers to the Commission to fix a date of its own convenience by holding a meeting when considered expedient for one candidate while adopting a different standard with regard to another candidate. This Court holds that the effective date for adoption of the period of three years for debarment shall be the date of the misdemeanor by the candidate occurred, that is the date of the examination. This Court holds that the effective date for adoption of the period of three years for debarment shall be the date of the misdemeanor by the candidate occurred, that is the date of the examination. The petitioner was clearly eligible to apply on the last date fixed for the receipt of application that is 3.8.2009 as the period of debarment expired on 7.7.2009. 7. The impugned order dated 27.3.2008 and the notice issued by the respondents as contained in Annexures-3 and 3A to the LA. No. 8457 of 2009 is not sustainable in so far as the petitioner is concerned. Jt is, accordingly, set aside. The petitioner is entitled to appear at the 27th Judicial Examination if he fulfils all other requirements for the same. 8. The application stands allowed. 9. This order has been passed in presence of the counsel for the Commission who is expected to duly appraise the authority.