LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

BIHAR STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ANR. versus HIMAL KUMARI & ANR. ETC.

Citation: [2024] 7 S.C.R. 970 · Decided: 16-07-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAM NATH · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 7 S.C.R. 970 : 2024 INSC 531
Bihar Staff Selection Commission & Anr.  
v. 
Himal Kumari & Anr. Etc.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 7815-7816 of 2024)
16 July 2024 
[Vikram Nath* and Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale, JJ.]
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.
Headnotes†
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 
* Author
[2024] 7 S.C.R. 
971
Bihar Staff Selection Commission & Anr. v. Himal Kumari & Anr. Etc.
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]
Case Law Cited
Employees’ State Insurance Corporation v. Union of India & Ors. 
[2022] 1 SCR 373 : (2022) 11 SCC 392 – referred to.
List of Acts
Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and Service Conditions) 
Rules, 2014; Constitution of India.
List of Keywords
Rule 5 and Rule 11 of Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and 
Service Conditions) Rules, 2014; Article 309 of the Constitution of 
India; Pragmatic and harmonious construction; Minimum qualifying 
marks; Prior work experience.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 7815-7816 of 
2024
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.12.2022 of the High Court of 
Judicature at Patna in LPA Nos. 412 and 109 of 2021
Appearances for Parties
Vijay Hansaria, Sr. Adv., Arun K. Sinha, Rakesh Singh, Sumit Sinha, 
Advs. for the Appellants.
Mrs. Anjana Prakash, Sr. Adv., Anuj Prakash, Namit Saxena, Niraj 
Dubey, Pradum Kumar, Ms. Rachitta Rai, Advs. for the Respondents.
972
[2024] 7 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
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. The said post is governed by the Bihar City Manager 
Cadre

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.