IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11623 of 2010 1. BHAGWAN BUDHA PRATHAMIK TEACHERS' TRAINING COLLEGE THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, RADHE SHYAM S/O LATE RASIK LAL R/O AT + P.S.- NIRMALI, DISTT.- SAHARASA, BIHAR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKAS BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA 4. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA 5. THE DY. SECRETARY, TEACHERS' TRAINING CELL, BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA 6. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, SUPAUL ----------- 2/ 09/08/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The claim in the writ application is to allow the students of the petitioner college to appear at the forthcoming Teachers Training Examination to be conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board. The petitioners claim to be the students of the session-89-91 to 93-97. They claim to have appeared at an earlier examination conducted by advertisement No.17/09 under orders of the Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) No.6511/09 dated 25.5.2009. The submission is that some of them are not being permitted to reappear in the next examination under advertisement No.27/2010. Further relief is sought with regard to those who were eligible to apply under advertisement No.17/09, but could not do so. Learned counsel for the Board rightly objects - 2 - that the aforesaid persons formed two separate categories and cannot be treated at par. Those who obtained interim orders from the Hon’ble Supreme Court form one class and those who did not, formed another. Issues of delay etc. may arise for consideration with regard to the latter. Those who were permitted to appear in pursuance of the order passed in S.L.P. (Civil) No.6511/09, but failed to clear the examination and wish to reappear form one class. Those who did not appear in pursuance of the order of the Supreme Court formed another class. This Court upholds the argument of the respondent Board that the two cannot be treated at par. Those in the former category have been permitted by the Supreme Court to appear in exercise of their powers under Article-142 of the Constitution of India upon which the order in (2007) 10 SCC 150 (SUNIL KUMAR PARIMAL AND ANOTHER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS.) is based. Learned counsel for the respondent Board has very fairly submitted that in view of the Supreme Court order there cannot be sufficient justification for the Board to debar those who appeared on the previous occasion under the aforesaid order of the Apex Court and wish to reappear. This Court allows the writ application to the extent only that such candidates are concerned. - 3 - The orders of the Supreme Court being in exercise of powers under Article-142 of the Constitution of India, this Court is not persuaded to delve into the merits as was sought to be urged on behalf of those who did not appear on the previous occasion that they were similarly situated on facts. The writ application is allowed, but only to the extent indicated. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)