Niraj Kumar vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.9 of 2024
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7453 of 2019
======================================================
Niraj Kumar, Son of Sri Sukhdeo Mahto, Resident of Village- Jagriti Tola,
P.S.- Mansi, District- Khagaria.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Human
Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar.
3. The District Magistrate, Khagaria, Patna.
4. The District Education Officer, Khagaria.
5. The Block Education Officer, Khagaria.
6. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Bela Simri, District- Khagaria.
7. Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Bela Simri, District- Khagaria.
8. The District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Khagaria.
9. The State Appellate Authoriy, Education Department, Bihar, Patna through
its Registrar, Niyojan Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
10. Niranjan Kumar, Son of Ganesh Mahto, Resident of Village and P.O.- Bela
Simri, P.S.- Mansi, District- Khagaria.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Avanindra Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Bishwash Vijeta, Advocate
Mr. Ram Naresh Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Additional Advocate General (13)
Mr.Brisketu Sharan Pandey, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH
CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI)

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
2/14
Date: 02-09-2026
1. The instant appeal is directed against an order of
dismissal of the writ petition, bearing C.W.J.C. No. 7453 of
th
2019, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 7 of
December, 2023, relying on a decision in an identical matter
in C.W.J.C. No. 13233 of 2019, which was disposed of by a
rd
Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide, judgement, dated 23 of
September, 2022.
2. Before dealing with the question as to whether
the judgement passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13233 of 2019 is
squarely applicable in C.W.J.C. No. 7453 of 2019, we feel it
necessary to narrate the following facts which led the
petitioner to file the writ petition. The writ petitioner filed the
nd
writ petition for quashing the order, dated 22 of January,
2019, passed by the Hon’ble Chairperson (J) in Appeal No. 1
of 2018, by which the learned Chairperson allowed the appeal
filed by the appellant, Niraj Kumar (Respondent No. 10 of the
th
writ petition), setting aside the order, dated 25 of November,
2013, passed by the District Teachers Employment Appellate
Tribunal, Khagaria in Case No. 06/01-2010. The writ
petitioner / appellant further prayed for revival and restoration
th
of the order, dated 25 of November, 2013, passed by the
District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Khagaria

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
3/14
in the aforesaid case.
3. The facts narrated by the appellant is as follows:-
In the year 1999, the appellant passed Secondary
nd
Examination in 2 Division. Thereafter, he also passed
Intermediate Examination from Koshi College, Khagaria. It
would not be out of place to mention that the appellant
belongs to Extremely Backward Class. In the year 2006, an
advertisement was issued for all Gram Panchayats of
Khagaria District, including Gram Panchayat, Raj Bela Simari
for filling up 11 vacancies on the post of Panchayat Teachers
in different category. The appellant duly applied for the said
th
post. The result was published on 30 of September, 2006. In
the merit list, the appellant’s name appeared at Serial No. 107,
whereas the name of the Respondent No. 10 was at Serial No.
th
175. On 8 of November, 2006, the first merit list of untrained
teacher was published under the provision of Section 9 vii
(kha) of Bihar Primary Teachers (Engagement and Service
Conditions) Rules, 2006, in which the name of the appellant
appeared at Serial No. 81. The name of the Respondent No.
10, Niranjan Kumar did not find place in the merit list, dated
th
8 of November, 2006, though, he took part in the counseling,
th
dated 30 of September, 2006 and his percentage of mark was

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
4/14
69.66 per cent. He belongs to EBC category. As such he filed
a representation before the Panchayat Secretory. Finally, the
said Niranjan Kumar and three others in connivance with the
then Panchayat Secretary were appointed as Panchayat
Teacher in newly created Primary School, Chharapatti in Bela
th
Simari Gram Panchayat on 24 of November, 2007.
th
Subsequently, on 26 of September, 2008 when lots of dispute
cropped up in respect of selection of Panchayat Teachers, the
Block Education Officer, Khagaria examined and verified
different fraudulent act in respect of appointment of the
candidates by the then Panchyat Secretary, Bela Simri. He
conducted an inquiry and found that the appointment of Mr.
Pramod Kumar Sexena and Niranjan Kumar (Respondent No.
10) illegal as their names did not appear in the merit list. The
petitioner submitted representations, stating, inter alia, that in
place of Niraj Kumar, he ought to be appointed. However, the
Panchayat Secretary failed to produce any document with
regard to appointment of Respondent No. 10 in the said
school. Finally, the matter went to the District Teachers
Employment Appellate Authority. The authority considered
the appointment of Niraj Kumar as illegal and it was directed
that in place of Niraj Kumar, the petitioner may be appointed.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
5/14
th
Against the said order passed by appellate authority on 25 of
November, 2013, the Respondent No. 10 Niraj Kumar filed a
writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No. 25586 of 2013. The said
writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge
directing the petitioner to file an appeal within 30 days from
nd
the date of the order which passed on 22 of November, 2017.
The Respondent No. 10 filed an appeal before the State
Appellate Authority and the State Appellate Authority allowed
the said appeal dismissing the order passed by the District
Teachers Employment Appellate Authority.
4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the writ
petitioner challenged the impugned order by filing C.W.J.C.
No. 7453 of 2019. Since the writ petition, having been
rd
disposed of in terms of judgement, dated 23 of September,
2022, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13233 of 2019, the present
appeal has been filed.
5. In order to appreciate the fate of the instant
appeal, we required to examine the decision of the learned
rd
Single Judge, dated 23 of September, 2022, passed in
C.W.J.C. No. 13233 of 2019 (Indradeo Pandi v. The State of
Bihar and Ors) in which one Pramod Kumar Sexena was
arrayed as Respondent No. 8.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
6/14
6. The learned Single Judge while disposing of
C.W.J.C. No. 13233 of 2019 held as hereunder:-
“14. In view thereof, this court
finds that the order passed by the State
Appellate Authority to be perverse to the
said extent. The petitioner has been
selected subsequently and his
appointment therefore could not have
been set aside. The case of the respondent
no.8 is found to be based on a forged
select list and the order of the District
Appellate Authority therefore rightly set
aside his appointment.
15. In view of above, the order
of the State Appellate Authority dated
17.05.2019 is set aside. The appointment
of petitioner is restored. The petitioner
shall be allowed to continue on the post
with all consequential benefits.”
7. There is, however, subsequent development. The
order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13233 of 2019 was challenged
by Private Respondent No. 8, Pramod Kumar Sexena in
th
L.P.A. No. 549 of 2022. By an order dated 16 of January,
2024, the Division Bench held that the Writ Court was
perfectly justified in taking note of the aforesaid facts and
setting aside the order passed by the Appellate Authority. We
rd
are in full agreement with the order dated 23 of September,

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
7/14
2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.
13233 of 2019 and same needs no interference. Thus, the
L.P.A. was dismissed.
8. The Respondent No. 8 in C.W.J.C. No. 13233 of
2019 preferred Civil Appeal No. 14622 of 2024 before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court passed
the following order. The relevant part of which is quoted
below:
“We are of the view that the procedure
adopted cannot be sustained in the eyes
of the law. As of now, there are two lists.
Therefore, the appointing authority or the
higher authorities ought to have taken a
decision on the genuineness of the lists.
The appellant has not been heard on the
issue of dismissal inasmuch as neither
was a copy of the enquiry report given
nor was the reason for removal indicated
to him.”
Now, without taking a decision on the
genuineness of the merit lists, the
appellant has been removed.
It has been submitted by the learned
counsel appearing for respondent no. 8
that the appellant did not even participate
in the counselling and that the records
have been manipulated, as indicated in

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
8/14
the enquiry report.
Considering the aforesaid scenario and
the submission made, we direct
respondent No. 2, namely, the Joint
Director, Primary Education Department
to conduct a full-fledged enquiry, after
giving due notice to the appellant and
respondent No. 8 and, if so required, the
others who were considered in the
counselling for the said category and,
thereafter, take a decision on the
appointment of the eligible persons.
While doing so, both the appellant and
respondent No. 8 ought to be given due
opportunity of being heard. They should
also be given a copy of the enquiry report
relied upon.
Both the enquiry reports, dated
24.09.2008 and 26.09.2008 given by the
Area Education Officer, Khagaria, Bihar
and the Block Education Officer,
Khagaria, Bihar, respectively are taken
on record.
We make it clear that the reason assigned
in the order of dismissal of the appellant,
not being in consonance with the law,
shall not be taken into account by
respondent No. 2 in taking a decision as
afore-stated. The entire exercise shall be
completed within a period of three

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
9/14
months from today.
In the meanwhile, the appointment of
respondent No. 8 shall continue, as he
has reportedly been in employment from
2014 onwards.
Liberty is granted to the parties to put
forth all their contentions before
respondent No.2.
The appeal stands disposed of,
accordingly. Pending application(s), if
any, shall stand disposed of.”
9. The learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant
has placed subsequent development that took place after
delivery of the judgement passed by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court.
10. It is submitted by him that after the judgment
passed by the Apex Court, the Director Primary Education
th
Department vide Memo No. 1526 dated 5 of June, 2025 upon
hearing the parties held that the claim of Pramod Kumar
th
Sexena was accepted holding that the merit list dated 8 of
November, 2006 was provisional and after consideration of
th
objection final merit list was published on 30 of November,
2006 in accordance with Rule 9 (vii) of Bihar Panchayat
Primary Teacher (Employment and Service conditions) Rules
2006.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
10/14
th
11. Thus, the final merit list, dated 30 of
November, 2006 was considered to be genuine and operative
and accordingly the claim of Parmod Kumar Sexena,
Respondent No. 8 in C.W.J.C. No. 13233 of 2019 was
accepted.
12. The judgement of the Apex Court in Civil
Appeal No. 14622 of 2024, Parmod Kumar Sexena v. State of
Bihar and Ors is now operative in the field. The issue has been
finally settled with regard to the question as to whether merit
th th
list dated 8 of November, 2006 or 30 of November, 2006
will prevail and be acted upon. It is now held by the
competent authority on the basis of the judgement passed by
th
the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the merit list dated 30 of
November, 2006 is applicable.
13. The learned Advocate on behalf of the State-
respondent refers to a Full Bench judgement of this Court in
the case of Kalpana Rani v. The State of Bihar & Ors. reported
in 2014 SCC OnLine Patna 400.
14. We are of considered view that in view of the
judgement passed in Civil Appeal No. 14622 of 2024 by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court, the judgement passed by the Full
Bench of this Court is not applicable under the facts and

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
11/14
circumstances of this case.
15. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the
private respondent that the respondent has already promoted to
the post of exclusive teacher under the Bihar School Exclusive
Teachers Rules, 2023. Rule 3 of the aforesaid Rules speaks
about the constitution of cadre. Rule 3 runs thus:-
“3. Constitution of Cadre:-
(1)All the Teachers employed by the
various tiers of local bodies (viz.
Panchayati Raj and Urban Bodies) shall
be required to pass the test prescribed
under Rule 4 and upon passing the test
and joining the allotted school thereafter
will be called "Exclusive Teachers". The
Local Bodies Teachers employed at
various tiers of local bodies shall stand
merged as a single cadre at the district
level from the date of joining the allotted
school as per the allotted district in the
competency test. They shall constitute a
separate cadre whose service conditions
shall henceforth be regulated by these
Rules.
Provided that these Exclusive
Teachers upon passing the competency
test under Rule 4 will be entitled to avail
the salary and other perks entitled to the
school teachers appointed under Bihar

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
12/14
State School Teachers (Appointment,
Transfer, Disciplinary Proceedings and
Service Conditions) Rules, 2023.
Provided further that any disciplinary
action, vigilance enquiry or any other
investigation pending against such"Local
Bodies" Teachers who become "Exclusive
Teachers", shall continue as per the
provisions of these new Rules.
(2) As and when anExclusive
Teacher retires or resigns or is dismissed,
the resulting vacancy shall not be filled
by local bodies. The Department shall be
competent to retain a certain percentage
of such vacancies for promotion of these
Exclusive Teachers and transfer the
remaining to the cadre of School Teachers
appointed under Bihar State School
Teachers (Appointment, Transfer,
Disciplinary Proceedings and Service
Conditions) Rules, 2023.
(3) Those "local bodies"
teachers who do not appear in or pass the
Competency Test as per Rule 4, shall
continue to remain "Local Bodies"
Teachers”
16. Thus, the above provision clearly shows that the
private respondent cannot be replaced by the appellant as the
exclusive teachers constitute a separate cadre and Sub-Section

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
13/14
(2) states that as and when an exclusive teacher retires or resigns
or dismissed, the resulting vacancy shall not be filled up by
local bodies. The department shall be competent to retain a
certain percentage of such vacancies for promotion of these
exclusive teachers and transfer the remaining to the cadre of
school teachers appointed under Bihar State School Teachers
(Appointment, Transfer, Disciplinary Proceedings and Service
Conditions) Rules, 2023. The appellant did not appear in or pass
the competency test for appointment of exclusive teachers.
Therefore, the private respondent cannot be replaced by the
appellant.
17. We find substance in the argument advanced by
the learned Advocate for the private respondent.
18. At the same time, we are not in a position to
ignore the judgment, passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Civil Appeal No. 14622 of 2024.
19. Accordingly, the instant appeal is disposed of
directing the Respondent No. 2, Director, Primary Education,
Bihar, herein, to consider the employment of the present
th
petitioner in the light of the merit list published on 30 of
November, 2006. If there is no vacancy for the post of
Panchayat Teacher, this case may be considered by creating

Patna High Court L.P.A No.9 of 2024 dt.02-09-2026
14/14
supernumerary post in the cadre of Panchayat Teacher.
20. For the reasons stated above, the instant appeal
is disposed of directing the respondent authority to consider
the employment of present the petitioner in the light of the
th
merit list published on 30 of November, 2006.
21. The learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant
submits that since the appellant was deprived of financial and
consequential benefits, he should be granted such benefits
th
from the date of publication of final merit list on 30 of
November, 2006.
22. We are not in a position to accept such
submission because of the fact that nobody can claim financial
benefits without rendering actual service.
23. The instant appeal is, thus, disposed of.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
Rana Vikram Singh, J : I agree.
(Rana Vikram Singh, J)
uttam/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 25.08.2026
Uploading Date 02.09.2026
Transmission Date 02.09.2026