Commission must freshly consider objections to awarded marks and pass a reasoned, speaking order.

The petitioner brought a second writ proceeding after an earlier order in CWJC No. 10283 of 2025 permitted him to submit a detailed representation about alleged anomalies in the award of marks and directed the Bihar State University Service Commission (“Commission”) to consider it and recalculate marks if necessary.

The Commission subsequently reviewed the petitioner’s academic performance score through subject-matter specialists and revised it from 328 to 340. The petitioner maintained that the calculation remained incorrect and that he was entitled to a higher score.

He filed a review application on 16 May 2026 identifying alleged discrepancies; a copy was annexed to the writ petition.

He contended that the Commission had not addressed the objections, while the Commission submitted that its order complied with the earlier directions and gave reasons.

1. Whether the Commission should be directed to reconsider the petitioner’s review application addressing alleged discrepancies in the award of marks

2. Whether that reconsideration should address the grounds raised by the petitioner through a reasoned and speaking order

The judgment cites no statute, regulation, or precedent.

It applies the principle that where a petitioner has specifically raised objections concerning the calculation of marks, the competent authority may be directed to consider those objections and deal with them in a reasoned and speaking order.

The petitioner had placed specific alleged anomalies before the Commission in a review application, and the Court considered that application warranted fresh consideration.

Rather than decide the disputed calculation itself, the Court directed the Commission to assess the review application in light of the grounds stated in it and to address all those grounds by a reasoned and speaking order.

The writ petition was disposed of with those directions.