Satish Kumar vs State Of Bihar

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had applied for the post of Teacher for Basic Grade General Teacher, as advertised by the respondents for the year 2019-2020 and in the mark sheet marks of vocational were also included and the respondents prepared the merit including the vocational marks. Thus, there was no fault on part of the petitioner, as he has not concealed any facts from the respondents. His merit was assessed as 67.79 and he was called for counseling. However, on a complaint received, the respondents issued a letter (as contained in Annexure - 7) to the petitioner informing that his merit has been reduced from 67.79 to 66.49 after deleting the marks obtained in the vocational subject resulting in ousting him from counseling.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner is not at fault and the fault lies with the concerned authorities, who counted the marks of the petitioner by including the marks in the vocational subject, petitioner cannot be made to suffer . He submits that as the respondents had called the petitioner for counseling treating his merit as 67.79 they are not stopped from changing his merits and ousting him from counseling.

It is settled that there is no estoppel against law.

As per the advertisement notification conditions were mentioned regarding the manner in which the merit lists shall be prepared and Clause -10 of the said notification dated 21.08.2020 specifically mentions of preparing merit lists after counting the marks obtained in the Matric Examination, Intermediate Examination and Training Course. It was also specifically mentioned as a note that the marks obtained in additional papers or optional papers of all subjects shall not be counted except where the optional paper is a compulsory subject. Admittedly, the vocational subject for which the petitioner has got mark was an optional paper and not a compulsory subject.

Since, as per the notification the marks in vocational subject could not have been counted error on part of any individual official in including the petitioner for counseling would not give benefit to the petitioner to remain included in the merit list and principle of estoppel shall have no application. A person with lessor marks cannot be allowed to participate in the counseling.

In view thereof the order passed by the respondents dated 06.01.2022 does not call for any intervention, the writ petition is misconceived. If the petitioner has any grievances regarding the wrongful action, he can always take appropriate civil remedy of tort against the concerned individual, who wrongfully included him in merit earlier.

Accordingly writ petition is dismissed.