Patna High CourtCWJC/12875/2025disposed

Rinku Verma v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-18Mr. Justice Ajit Kumar6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12875 of 2025 ====================================================== Rinku Verma W/O Kundan Kumar, R/O Ward No. 32, Belbag Bengali Colony, P.O. and P.S.-Bettiah, District- East Champaran-845438. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

The Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4.

The Secretary, The Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna 5.

The Chairman, The Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Sakshi Bhatnagar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, Government Pleader (5) For the BPSC :

Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Advocate Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application for the following reliefs :- (i) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/Rule(s)/ directions), in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 01.07.2025 bearing memo no. 1837 (Annexure-P/6) issued by the Director (Primary Education) Education Department, Bihar, Patna, (Respondent No, 3) whereby and whereunder allotment of

2/6 districts to the Head Teachers has been done in an illegal and arbitrary manner, without considering the preferences submitted by the Head Teachers for allotment of districts and the merit position of candidates. (ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/Rule(s)/ directions), in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities especially Respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 to refrain from giving effect to the allotment of districts to the Head Teachers vide order dated 01.07.2025 bearing memo no. 1837 (Annexure-P/6) issued by the Director (Primary Education) Education Department, Bihar, Patna, (Respondent No. 3) whereby and whereunder allotment of districts to the Head Teachers has been done in an illegal and arbitrary manner, without considering the preferences submitted by the Head Teachers for allotment of districts and the merit position of candidates.

(iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/Rule(s)/ directions), in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities especially Respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 to undertake a fresh exercise with respect to allotment of districts in respect of the Head Teachers as a

3/6 consequence to quashing the order dated 01.07.2025 bearing memo no. 1837 (Annexure-P/6) issued by the Director (Primary Education) Education Department, Bihar, Patna, (Respondent No. 3) whereby and whereunder allotment of districts to the Head Teachers has been done in an illegal and arbitrary manner, without considering the preferences submitted by the Head Teachers for allotment of districts and the merit position of candidates.

(iv) For Issuance of an ad interim direction upon the respondent authorities especially Respondent No. 1, 2 and, 3 to refrain from giving effect to the recommendations and allotment of districts in respect of Head Teachers as directed vide order dated 01.07.2025 bearing memo no. 1837 (Annexure-P/6) issued by the Director (Primary Education) Education Department, Bihar, Patna, (Respondent No. 3) in so far as the same relates to the present petitioner during the pendency of the present writ application;

(v) For any other relief that the Petitioner may be found to be entitled to in regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case.

4/6

3. It is submitted by the petitioner that pursuant to the advertisement issued by the B.P.S.C., as contained in Memo No.25/2024 dated 01.03.2024, the petitioner participated in the process of selection for consideration to the post of Head Teacher in different primary schools within the State of Bihar. After having completed the requisites, the petitioner is said to have been appointed and provisional merit list was published and further counseling was conducted of all the selected candidates and the petitioner participated and after verification of the documents, the petitioner is said to have been directed by the Director, Primary Education, to give reference of locations of their choice as Head Teachers. The petitioner is said to have filed her choice and further the choice of district, as per the merit cum choice and it is the grievance of the petitioner that even the district, as per the merit and her choice, was not considered by the authority.

4. It is next submitted by the petitioner that the petitioner had given her choice of district and while doing so, her first choice was West Champaran and it is the case of the petitioner that neither the district as per the choice nor the blocks within the districts, to which web copy is appended at Annexure-P/5 at page 34, has been considered by the

5/6 authorities. The petitioner prepared a chart in which she has mentioned that the petitioner was not given preference at the time of allocating the district and further even allocation of blocks within the districts has also not been considered, which would be apparent from the merit list in which she is placed at Serial No.49152, whereas the persons who are said to be placed afterwards have been given choice posting. Since the Government has come out with a policy to bring uniformity in the place of posting, as per the choice and even the merit list was also to be respected, thus, in such view of the matter, the minimum expectation from the respondent-authorities was that they should have respected their own policies while allocating districts as well as blocks within the district.

Apparently, in the present case the said consideration appears to be absent. Since the petitioner proposes to file a detailed representation indicating her choice of district as well as blocks within the districts which in terms of the policy decision of the State Government, it was expected from all such petitioners and the authorities were also required to give a serious look to those choice by appreciating their merits.

5. In such view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to file a representation within a period of one week from today

6/6 and such representation, if so filed, is required to be considered by the authorities being Director, Primary Education, who is arrayed as party-respondent No.3, within a period of three weeks thereafter and such decision must be communicated so that the petitioner may ensure her joining to the said post within the said period.

6. Accordingly, the writ application stands disposed off.

(Ajit Kumar, J) sharun/- U