Rinku Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13103 of 2025 ====================================================== Rinku Kumari Wife of Pankaj Kumar Resident of Kautilya Nagar, West of Tara Tower, P.S Shastri Nagar, District-Patna-800023. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary,Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4.
The Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna. through its Secretary. 5.
The Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna. 6.
The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Ms. Kumari Amrita, GP-3 Mr. AC to GP-3 For the B.P.S.C.
:
Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 22-09-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:
"(i) Issuance of a direction, order or writ, including writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 01.07.2025 bearing memo no. 1837 (Annexure-P/9) issued by the Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Bihar, Patna (respondent no. 3) by which allotment of districts on the basis of application submitted by the Head Teacher appointed on the basis of the recommendation made by a letter dated 19.11.2024 by the concerned authorities under the Bihar Public Service
2/4 Commission, Patna (hereinafter referred to as "the Commission") have been allotted districts purportedly on merit-cum-choice basis, by which in the most illegal and arbitrary manner, even without taking note of the merit position of candidates and also the preferences submitted by them allotment of districts have been effected;
(ii) Issuance of a direction, order or writ, including writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the concerned respondent authorities under the Education Department of the State Government to refrain from giving effect to the allotment of districts in respect of the present petitioner as in blatant disregard of the preferences submitted by the petitioner despite having a better merit position than the other candidates, he has been allotted district contrary to the preferences submitted by her in furtherance of the order dated 01.07.2025 bearing memo no. 1837 in view of the fact that notwithstanding the better higher position, the preferences submitted by the petitioner have been ignored and the persons below her have been allotted the districts the choice of the present petitioner;.
(iii) Issuance of a direction, order or writ, including writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the concerned respondent authorities under the Education Department of the State Government to undertake a fresh exercise with respect to allotment of districts in respect of the Head Teacher appointment on the basis of the recommendation as contained in a letter dated 19.11.2024 issued by the Commission pursuant to the process of selection conducted in furtherance of advertisement no. 25/2024 published by the Commission while applying the principle of
3/4 merit-cum-choice in a letter and spirit and accordingly, while taking note of the merit position of the present petitioner and other similarly situated persons appointed against the post of Head Teacher allot her the district on the basis of the preferences submitted by her;
(iv) Issuance of an ad interim direction upon the concerned respondent authorities under the Education Department of the State Government to refrain from giving effect to the recommendations and allotment of districts in respect of Head Teacher as communicated by the impugned order dated 01.07.2025 bearing memo no. 1837 in so far as the same relates to the petitioner during the pendency of the present writ application; (v) Any other relief that the petitioner may be found to be entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case".
3. Learned Advocates for the respective parties, after some arguments, fairly submitted that the identical issue has come up for consideration before this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 11252 of 2025 [Preeti Kumari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.] along with other analogous cases which came to be disposed off on 30.08.2025, wherein this Court in penultimate paragraph has observed and directed the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna to convene a meeting with the Director, Secondary Education as well as the Director, Primary Education, to frame a model for redressal of grievance of allocation of nearby district after
4/4 inviting objection, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners further submitted at the Bar that there are some of the Teachers, who have submitted their joining under protest on the place beyond preferential option(s) and their claim has not been taken care of in the afore-noted, C.W.J.C. No.11252 of 2025 along with other analogous cases, they have preferred CWJC No. 11187 of 2025 and their cases have also been disposed of vide order dated 08.09.2025, by observing that the teachers, who have submitted their joining under protest, are in no way deprived from filing objection.
5. Considering the submissions, the present writ petition also stands disposed off in terms with the decisions rendered in the case of Preeti Kumari (supra) as also in C.W.J.C. No. 11187 of 2025 [Archana Kumari vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.] along with other analogous cases which came to be disposed of on 08.09.2025.
(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 23.09.2025 Transmission Date NA