Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 284 (PAT)

Neeraj Kumar v. State of Bihar

2020-05-22

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

body2020
Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. – The matter has been heard via video conferencing in view of the lockdown imposed on account of the COVID-19 pandemic. 2. Heard Mr. Dinu Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, learned Additional Advocate General 15 for the State; Mr. Gyan Shankar, learned counsel for the Bihar School Examination Board (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Board’); Mr. P K Shahi, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Vipin Kumar, learned counsel for intervenor-applicants of Interlocutory Application No. 2 of 2020; Mr. Arun Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the proposed intervenor-applicant of Interlocutory Application No. 1 of 2020 and Mr. Navendu Kumar, learned counsel for the intervenor-applicants of Interlocutory Application No. 3 of 2020. 3. The petitioners have moved the Court for the following reliefs: – “A To hold and declare examination held on 28-01-2020 of Secondary Teachers Eligibility Test 2019 in the State of Bihar is fit to be declared void, illegal and contrary to the Schedule and prescribed syllabus in the subject of Mathematics, Science and Social Science. B. Also for commanding the Bihar School Examination Board authority to cancel the examination of Secondary Teacher Eligibility Test 2019 held on 28.01.2020 at different centers in the State of Bihar except A. N. College, Patna, L. P. Sahi Inter College, Patahi, Mahendra Mahila College, Gopalganj, R. M. College, Saharsa whose examination has already cancelled. C. Also commanding the respondents to conduct a fresh examination of Bihar Teachers Eligibility Test 2019 as per syllabus indicated in schedule issued by Bihar School Examination Board for examination of Secondary Teachers Eligibility Test 2019 as contained in Annexure…….. D. Also hold and declare examination held on 28.01.2020 of Secondary Teachers Eligibility Test 2019 in different centers in the State of Bihar is based on malpractice, leakage of question on social media as whats app, facebook, not free from doubt, not free and fair examination. E. Also for necessary relief/reliefs, order/orders, direction/directions, for which the petitioner is entitled in the eye of law.” 4. On 12.05.2020, the matter was adjourned at the request of learned counsel for the Board who had prayed for time to file counter affidavit. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Board, which is on record. 5. E. Also for necessary relief/reliefs, order/orders, direction/directions, for which the petitioner is entitled in the eye of law.” 4. On 12.05.2020, the matter was adjourned at the request of learned counsel for the Board who had prayed for time to file counter affidavit. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Board, which is on record. 5. At the very outset, learned counsel for the Board pointed out that the writ petition has become infructuous as the Board has itself cancelled the Secondary Teachers’ Eligibility Test, 2019, which was the prayer of the petitioners in the present writ application. It was submitted that the same has been done by order of the Board dated 16.05.2020. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in the aforesaid background, submitted that he would not be pressing the writ application. However, he pointed out to the stand of the Board, as taken in the counter affidavit, with regard to framing of questions in various subjects for the concerned examination, which, according to him, is at variance with the modalities prescribed in the advertisement. 7. Be that as it may, without going into such issues, the Court finds that the prayer of the writ petitioners for cancellation of the examination no more subsists as the Board itself has cancelled the examination after holding an enquiry. Thus, the writ petition having become infructuous, stands disposed off. 8. With regard to the prayer made in the Interlocutory Applications, which were filed challenging such decision of cancellation of the examination in question by the Board, without expressing any opinion thereon, the Court would only observe that it being a fresh cause of action, it shall be open to the concerned intervenor-applicants to move in the matter, before the appropriate forum, in accordance with law. 9. Before parting, the Court would only observe that the examination and the setting of questions in the papers concerned is required to be done strictly in conformity with the terms of the advertisement published by the Board for the said examination.