Patna High Court directs BTSC to consider a medical graduate’s experience marks, ruling that candidates cannot be penalized for delays or errors by government officials, ensuring fairness and transparency in recruitment under Advertisement No. 19 of 2025.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
PATNA: In a landmark judgment, the Patna High Court ruled in favor of a medical graduate who was unfairly denied experience marks during recruitment for General Medical Officer under Bihar Technical Service Commission (BTSC) Advertisement No. 19 of 2025. The Court’s decision reinforces transparency, fairness, and protection of candidates’ rights in government recruitment.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, an MBBS graduate, applied for the post of General Medical Officer under BTSC Advertisement No. 19 of 2025, issued on 10th March 2025. He qualified in the written examination and was called for document verification, receiving an acknowledgment receipt stating he had scored 48.3664 marks, including both written exam and work experience points.
However, the petitioner’s experience marks were deducted because the work experience certificate, although valid and issued by the In-charge Medical Officer of Community Health Centre, Paharpur, was not issued in the exact prescribed format by the Civil Surgeon-cum-CMO, as required by the advertisement.
Legal Issue
The petitioner argued that:
- He had valid contractual experience in a government hospital after completing his MBBS.
- Deducting experience marks was through no fault of his own, as the Civil Surgeon-cum-CMO delayed issuing the certificate in the correct format.
- He should not be penalized for an administrative error by a State functionary.
BTSC maintained that rules required certificates in a specific, prescribed format, with a fixed cut-off date for submission.
Court’s Analysis and Observation
Hon’ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri examined the clauses of the BTSC advertisement and noted:
“Clearly, the shoe is on the other foot. The respondents are trying to take advantage of their own wrong for issuing an incorrect certificate and making the petitioner run from pillar to post. Their stand is, therefore, being noted only to be rejected.”
The Court highlighted that candidates cannot be penalized for errors committed by state functionaries:
“The mistake was committed by a State functionary, i.e., Respondent No. 5, for which the petitioner cannot be held responsible.”
It also observed that the Civil Surgeon-cum-CMO had a duty to issue the certificate in the prescribed format, and delays or errors were beyond the candidate’s control.
Court Directions
The Patna High Court issued clear directions to ensure fairness:
- The Civil Surgeon-cum-CMO must issue the experience certificate in the prescribed format within one week.
- BTSC is instructed to consider the petitioner’s experience while finalizing the recruitment results, in accordance with Advertisement No. 19 of 2025.
- Parties may act on the server copy of the order to expedite the process.
The Court emphasized:
“Since final result has not been published, the BTSC is directed to take into account the experience certificate of the petitioner and act in accordance with the Advertisement No. 19 of 2025 and thereafter consider his candidature.”
Appearance:
For the Petitioner: Advocate Nivedita Nirvikar
For the Respondent: Advocate General
For the BTSC: Advocates Nikesh Kumar, Akshansh Shankar
Case Title:
Shivkant Patel Versus The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar & Others
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15986 of 2025
Click Here to Read More Reports On Medical
