Mundrika Kumar Ram @ Mundirka Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14670 of 2025 ====================================================== Mundrika Kumar Ram @ Mundirka Kumar Ram Son of Gena Ram Resident of Village- Parshurampur, Block-Phenhara, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, East Champaran. 2.

The District Magistrate, East Champaran.

3.

The District Welfare Officer, East Champaran. 4.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Pakaridayal, East Champaran. 5.

The Sub Divisional Welfare Officer, Pakaridayal, East Champaran. 6.

The Block Development Officer, Phenhara Block, East Champaran. 7.

The Block Welfare Officer, Phenhara Block, East Champaran. 8.

Ram Pravesh Ram, Son of Raghubir Ram Resident of VillageParshurampur, Block- Phenhara, District- East Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Standing Counsel (28) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-09-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present application has been filed for the following reliefs:- (i) For issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders for direction to respondent authorities to consider the complaint/representation dated 12.04.2025 and 08.08.2025 filed by the petitioner and to set aside the selection of respondent no.8 on the post of Vikas Mitra in Panchayat Phenhara in Phenhara block of East Champaran District, as he had obtained appointment fraudulently on the basis of

Patna High Court CWJC No.14670 of 2025(2) dt.23-09-2025 2/2 wrong date of birth forged and fabricated mark sheet.

(ii) For direction to consider the petitioner for the appointment on the post as he has much higher marks than respondent no.8 and for any other order/orders which the petitioner may found to be entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied if his representation dated 12.04.2025 is directed to be disposed of by Respondent No. 5.

4. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to such a prayer.

5. Accordingly, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to Respondent No. 5 to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 12.04.2025, in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned order within a period of six weeks from today.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Neha/- U