IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2494 of 2009 Vikash Tiwari . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- 5. 11.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and for the Bihar Staff Selection Commission. The petitioner was an applicant under Advertisement No. 704 of 2004 for the post of Sub- Inspector of Police. An order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 9155 of 2008 and analogous cases dated 25.11.2008 led to the redrawing up of the merit list. The petitioner contends that in this fresh merit list one Md. Ghulam Shahbaj Alam belonging to the general category like the petitioner secured 232.67 marks. He has been given appointment. The petitioner who has 233.27 marks has been denied appointment. The Commission earlier in its counter affidavit took a stand that the aforesaid person had not been selected and denied appointment. The petitioner in his rejoinder acknowledged the same. Today the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit bringing on record the L.P.A. No. 553 of 2011 filed by the Commission against the aforesaid Md. Ghulam Shahbaj Alam. A Division Bench after considering the case of the parties has observed as follows:- “Thus, the common stand of the respondents and the appellant is that the required appointment shall 2 be made. Since the concerned parties have come to mutually agreed stand, which is in accord with the direction of the Writ Court, nothing survives in the appeal” The limited submission now is that it stands beyond controversy that the petitioner has more marks then Md. Shahbaj Alam. If the respondents have agreed to consider his case the petitioner certainly has a better claim. Prima facie, the Court is satisfied that the petitioner appears to have made out a case for consideration of his candidature in accordance with law if a person with lesser marks then him has been agreed to be considered. Let the Commission do the necessary consideration of the candidature of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid discussion and then proceed to act in accordance with law in so far as the present petitioner is concerned. Let the case of the petitioner be considered by the Commission simultaneously at the time when the name of aforesaid Md. Ghulam Shahbaj Alam is taken up for consideration. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)