IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.1669 OF 2010 CHANDRA BHUSHAN PASWAN, SON OF RAM PRASAD PASWAN, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA R BLOCK, FOURTH GRADE, QUARTER NO. 85, ROAD NO. 6, POLICE STATION SACHIWALAYA, DISTRICT PATNA VERSUS 1. THE BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, 15 JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MARG, PATNA 2. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, 15 JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MARG, PATNA 3. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, 15 JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MARG, PATNA 4. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, BIHAR, PATNA ………………………………………………………………………………RESPONDENTS ********** 3 28/04/2010 The petitioner has challenged the 48th to 52nd Competitive Examination of the Bihar Public Service Commission held vide Advertisement No. 4 of 2007. The ground for challenging the publication of the preliminary examination results is that the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that 17 questions out of 150 questions were deleted. It is said that the petitioner has answered correctly these 17 questions and as such is highly prejudiced by their deletion. These 17 questions which have been deleted, either two possible answers or are incorrectly framed. An Expert Committee was constituted to examine this aspect and thereafter the questions have been deleted. These questions have been deleted uniformly for all the candidates appearing in the said examination 2 and as such, it cannot be said that the questions were arbitrarily deleted from the list of questions set for the examination. The preliminary examination results were challenged earlier before this Court which was disposed of on 30.01.2009 setting aside the preliminary tests. Six appeals were filed against that order which were disposed of by the Division Bench on 19.05.2009 which is reported in 2009 (3) PLJR 878 (The Bihar Public Service Commission & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh and others.) While hearing the appeals, one of the questions that was raised before the Division Bench was that the Bihar Public Service Commission had arbitrarily deleted 17 questions, from the set of questions, and as such the examination should be set aside. This aspect of the matter has been discussed by the Division Bench and ultimately, the Division Bench has held as follows:- “To conclude this aspect of the matter, the defective questions suggested by learned Counsel for the petitioners are taken care of by instruction no. 9, and have also been taken care of by the report of the twelve- member Committee which was accepted by the Commission with certain modifications, and 14 questions were deleted. Everybody was earlier required 3 to answer the same 150 questions, and after deletion the same 136 questions. Therefore, none gained any advantage, nor anybody suffered any prejudice, in a situation where the candidates had no choice of selection between different questions”. The Division Bench had ordered that a special examination should be held for the 94 candidates who had filed a complaint. Accordingly, a special examination was conducted and the petitioner is amongst those persons for whom the special preliminary examination has been conducted. Having considered the petitioner’s objection that 17 questions have been deleted arbitrarily, this Court comes to the conclusion that those 17 questions were deleted for all the 94 candidates and as such, it cannot be held by this Court that the Bihar Public Service Commission had acted in an unreasonable manner and unfair standards were used for deleting the questions. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also submits on the basis of the newspaper report that some of the candidates who have not appear in the preliminary examination have been declared to be successful. This Court cannot rely on such newspaper reporting as there is no material or basis for giving such information. The final results have already been 4 published. This application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)