Sunita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7482 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.
Sunita Kumari W/o- Yogendra Kumar, R/o Vill- Mai Jee Ki Kutiya Shakhra, P.S.- Dehri Muffasil, Dis- Rohtas.
2.
Usha Kumari, W/o Pramod Singh, R/o Vill- Narsingh Bigha, P.S.- Dehri Muffasil, Dis- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The District Education Officer, Rohtas.
4.
The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Rohtas. 5.
The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Standing Counsel (20) Mr. Md. Zeeshan Kalim, AC to SC-20 For the Resp. No.5 :
Mr. P.K. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Kumar Shanu, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
2. The writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs :- i). In the nature of "Mandamus" directing and commanding the Respondent Authorities to treat the petitioner no. I as Exclusive Teacher with effect from 01.03.2025 and the petitioner no. 2 w.e.f. 01.01.2025 and direct the respondent authorities to pay the petitioners all consequential benefits after being appointed as Exclusive
Patna High Court CWJC No.7482 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026 2/3 Teachers.
ii. In the nature of "Certioruri" for setting aside the annotation "doubtful" with respect to passing of petitioners Graduate degree from Vinayaka Missions University, Salem, Tamil Nadu, India and a further direction to treat the said certificate valid.
iii. For issuance of any other relief reliefs for which the petitioners are entitled for.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issues with regard to the decree obtained from Vinayak Mission University, Research Foundation, Salem, Tamil Nadu, which is treated to be a deemed University, while, it has got institutional recognition from the period 2007 till 2012 and further programme wise recognition has also been granted from 20112012 to 2013-2014 and admittedly, these petitioners have also pursued and completed their graduation and post-graduation in between session 2011-2012 to 2013-2014 and their results have been declared in 2011, as such, the cases of these petitioners are also similarly situated to that of the petitioner in Rajeev Kumar and Others v. The State of Bihar and Others, C.W.J.C. No.3228 of 2025.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State does not dispute the factual legal position, which is obtaining on record and as also the judgment, appended with the writ petition as Annexure-P/3, which covers the cases of these petitioners.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7482 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026 3/3
5. Considering the stand of the parties, this Court held that because of no fault of the petitioners, they have been belatedly allowed to appear in the counseling by treating their certificate as doubtful, and for that the petitioner may not be made to suffer, accordingly, this Court directs the authorities to take final decision with regard to the seniority of this petitioners with the persons who have been allowed to appear in the counseling strictly in consonance with the parameter fix by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Rajeev Kumar (supra) and on adjudication, if the authorities finds the case to be justified in law, similar treatment shall be given to the petitioners, at par with the petitioner of of C.W.J.C. No.3228 of 2025.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Ajit Kumar, J) sharun/- U