Manish Kumar Chaudhary, v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3100 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.
Manish Kumar Chaudhary, Son of Shivji Chaudhary, Resident of VillageSemra, Purab Tola, P.S.-Thawe, District-Gopalganj. 2.
Nandlal Ram, Son of Yogendra Ram, Resident of Village-Pitauri, P.S.- Thawe, District-Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.
The District Education Officer, Gopalganj.
5.
The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gopalganj. 6.
The Block Education Officer, Manjha, Gopalganj. 7.
The Headmaster, Navsrijit Primary School, Malikana, Dhamapakad, Manjha, Gopalganj.
8.
The Headmaster, Navsrijit Primary School, Dewariya, Manjha, Gopalganj. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Satyam Shivam Sundaram, Advocate Mr.Ankit, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Ms.Namrata Singh, AC to EX GA 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-07-2025 Heard Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundaram along with Mr. Ankit, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Ms.Namrata Singh, learned AC to Ex.GA 12 for the State.
2. The specific order was passed by the learned District Appellate Authority on 10.01.2018 in Appeal No.284 of 2015 in the case of petitioner no.1 and order dated 22.09.2017 in Appeal No.61 of 2016 in the case of petitioner no.2 to allow both the petitioners to join their respective school.
3. Ms. Namrata Singh, learned counsel for the State informs that joining of both the petitioners has been accepted in
Patna High Court CWJC No.3100 of 2021(6) dt.28-07-2025 2/2 their respective schools and submitted that the grievance of the petitioners has been redressed.
4. This Court appreciates the steps taken by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
5. The petitioners no.1 and 2 were deliberately restrained by the Incharge Headmasters of the School from joining their respective school from 10.01.2018 and from 22.09.2017 respectively in spite of the District Programme Officer (Establishment) had given a specific clarification, vide order dated 03.10.2018 contained in Memo No.800 by which he had directed the Block Education Officer to accept the joining of both the petitioners in their respective schools but the concerned Headmasters, who were posted from 10.01.2018 and 22.09.2017 respectively have restrained them. The inaction being deliberate and wilful on the part of the Headmasters concerned requires appropriate action against them in accordance with law.
6.The present writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions and the observations.
(Purnendu Singh, J) chn/- U ..