IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6613 of 2009 SATENDRA SHARMA Versus BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS ----------- 2 22/5/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Commission. Grievance of the petitioner in this writ application is only for issuance of a fresh admit card. Such grievance, in fact, seems to be now wholly lop sided and/or a half hearted approach of the petitioner towards the main contentious issue involved in the writ petition. The petitioner has already appeared in the combined preliminary competitive examination, 2008 (48th to 52nd) batch conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission and his roll number was 344554 and his answer book has also been evaluated in he has secured 83 marks, whereas, cut off marks in his category is 96. The Commission, in fact, by a mistake on account of duplication of two candidates having same roll number, i.e, Roll No. 344554 had earlier published result of the petitioner as a successful candidate and therefore such mistake is sought to be rectified by issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner as would appear from a copy thereof (retained in the records of this case) produced by Mr. Lalit Kishore, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the Commission. The petitioner in terms of the aforesaid show cause notice has therefore been given an opportunity to explain his case 2 in reply to the said show cause notice before the Commission. This Court would, therefore, direct the petitioner to now file his show cause reply to the said show cause, whereafter the Commission will take a decision in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of filing his reply to such show cause notice. It is however made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of claim of the petitioner and therefore on noticing that the matter is still pending before the Commission it would direct the Commission for taking an appropriate decision in accordance with law within the time limit as indicated above in this order. It goes without saying that if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the decision of Commission he may take further recourse as may be available to him in law. With the aforementioned observations/directions this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)