Kashi Nath Mandal vs The State of Bihar
- Court
- Patna High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15876 of 2026
CNR No. BRHC011039042026
======================================================
Kashi Nath Mandal Son of Late Bandhan Mandal, Resident of Village-
Baidauli, P.O.- Panchdeori, P.S.- Kateya, District- Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar,
New Secretariat, Patna.
2. The District Education Officer, Gopalganj.
3. The District Programme Officer (Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan), Gopalganj.
4. The Block Education Officer, Panchdeori, P.O. and P.S.-Panchdeori,
District- Gopalganj.
5. The Headmaster, Govt. Primary School, Ahirauli, Block-Panchdeori,
District- Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bipin Bihari Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Jyoti Kumari, AC to GP-29
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 26-10-2026
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for a
direction upon the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in
service with all consequential benefits, including back wages, in
strict compliance with the final order dated 08.05.2024 passed
by the learned District Appellate Authority, Gopalganj in
Appeal No. 08 of 2018 (Kashi Nath Mandal vs. The District
Education Officer, Gopalganj & Ors.) which has attained
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
2/11
finality in the absence of any challenge by the respondents
before an appropriate statutory forum or Court of Law within
the prescribed period of limitation, and further for the issuance
of any other necessary relief or reliefs to which the petitioner
may be found entitled.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner was appointed as a Tola Sevak through
appointment order issued by the competent authorities
comprising the Headmaster, the Block Education Officer and
the Cluster Resource Centre (CRC) Coordinator and was posted
at Government Primary School, Ahirauli under the Panchdeori
Block in the Gopalganj district. His joining was accepted and he
started working there. The petitioner received his salary for his
work, however , despite his unblemished and exemplary service
record, his contract was not renewed by the respondent
authorities relying upon letter No. 693 dated 14.09.2013, issued
by the District Programme Officer pursuant to the directions
issued by the Bihar Education Project Council, Patna, whereby
the Madhyama Certificate issued to the petitioner by the Bihar
Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna, was not found equivalent to the
Matriculation qualification.
4. Being aggrieved with the action of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
3/11
Respondents, the petitioner preferred several representations
before the higher authorities, including the District Education
Officer, Gopalganj and the District Magistrate, Gopalganj.
Thereafter, the petitioner filed Miscellaneous Case No. 02 of
2018 before the District Magistrate, Gopalganj which was
forwarded to the District Teachers Appellate Tribunal,
Gopalganj for consideration and to take necessary decision. The
case was numbered as Appeal No. 08 of 2018 before the District
Teachers Appellate Tribunal, Gopalganj, where despite notice
the opposite parties/Respondents failed to appear or file
rejoinder, despite valid service of notice.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that the tribunal after hearing the parties at length vide
order dated 08.05.2024 allowed the appeal field by the
petitioner by quashing the letter no. 693 dated 14.09.2013 issued
by the District Programme Officer (Sarva Siksha Abhiyan) and
directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner on the post of
Tola Sevak forthwith, clear all outstanding arrears of his
honorarium, but the said order was not implemented. He
submits that after passing of the order dated 08.05.2024, the
petitioner filed representation before the Headmaster as well as
the Block Education Officer for compliance of the directions
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
4/11
issued by the District Appellate Authority, Gopalganj. When no
action was taken by the authorities concerned, the petitioner
filed a representation before the District Programme Officer
(S.S.A.), Gopalganj on 06.06.2024 with a request to implement
the order passed by the District Teachers Appellate Authority,
Gopalganj. When no action was taken by the authorities
concerned, then the petitioner was constrained to file a
representation before the District Education Officer, Gopalganj
on 19.05.2025, however, despite the representation filed by the
petitioner, no action has been taken by the respondent
authorities. Finally, vide letter no. 179 dated 22.08.2025 issued
under the signature of the District Programme Officer (S.S.A.),
Gopalganj, a direction was issued to the In-charge Headmaster,
Government Primary School, Ahirauli to submit the relevant
service record and the status with regard to the petitioner,
however, the Headmaster did not comply the directions issued
vide letter dated 22.08.2025. Again, the District Education
Officer, Gopalganj vide Memo no. 771 dated 20.06.2026
directed the Headmaster of the concerned school to physically
appear with the documents of the petitioner on 23.06.2026,
however even then the Headmaster did not appear.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
5/11
despite the favourable order in his favour, the respondent
authorities are sitting tight over the matter and the petitioner is
running from pillar to post. He submits that long inaction on the
part of the respondent authorities tantamounts to obstruction in
course of justice. The State and its authorities are the
stakeholders in the facet of administration of justice, therefore,
when the orders passed by an authority is not being taken care
of by the State Authorities, the petitioner has been left with no
other option, but to approach this Hon’ble Court.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
in similar circumstance the learned Co-ordinate Benches of this
Hon’ble Court vide order dated 19.08.2025 passed in CWJC no.
of 13018 of 2025 (Raju Yadav Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.)
and order dated 20.04.2026 passed in CWJC no. 2920 of 2026
(Kumari Rashmi Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) have been
pleased to direct the authorities concerned for accepting the
joining of the petitioner and also directing for taking action
against the concerned authorities. The learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is similar to the
case of Raju Yadav (Supra) and Kumari Rashmi (Supra),
therefore, same relief be granted to the petitioner.
8. Per contra , the learned counsel for the State
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
6/11
submits that in terms of Rule 16 of the Bihar State Teaching
Institutions Teachers & Employees (Dispute, Redressal and
Appeal) Rules 2020, the petitioner has an alternative remedy of
filing Miscellaneous Case and the said Rule 16 gives power to
impose punishment. Rule 16 is quoted herein below:-
16. Power to impose Punishment - In case of
non-compliance of the order/direction or in case
of any complaints by the party for compliance of
the order:-
(i) The Appellate Authority shall impose
punishment against concerned party but he will
be given adequate opportunity of hearing before
imposing punishment.
(ii) The Appellate Authority may impose penalty
upto Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only)
upon the answerable party. The amount of
penalty shall be deposited in the Treasury under
the head indicated by the Department. The
amount of penalty shall be recoverable by way of
public demand.
(iii) The Appellate Authority shall have
jurisdiction to make recommendation to the
concerned Department to initiate Departmental
proceeding or to take necessary action against
the delinquent employee under the provisions of
the Bihar Service Code/ Bihar Panchayat Raj
Act, 2006/Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 and other
relevant provisions.
9. At this juncture it has been informed by the learned
counsel for the petitioner that the District Teachers Appellate
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
7/11
Authority is non functional since December 2025. The learned
counsel for the petitioner further submits that recently a learned
Co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 08.07.2026
passed in CWJC no. 9258 of 2026 (Shilpi @ Silpi Vs. The
State of Bihar) by making reference to the orders passed in the
case of Raju Yadav (Supra) and Kumari Rashmi (Supra)
disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Additional
Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar
Patna for taking appropriate action against the District
Programme Officer (Establishment), Gopalganj, for issuing
necessary orders in this regard and further directed that the
District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gopalganj, be
called upon to explain by the departmental head, as to why the
order of the District Appellate Officer, Gopalganj is not being
complied with and appropriate proceeding be drawn against the
District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gopalganj, besides
awarding appropriate compensation for causing unnecessary
harassment upon the petitioner. It was further directed that the
amount of compensation shall be quantified by the
Departmental Head and should be paid to the petitioner. The
amount of compensation shall be recovered from the District
Programme Officer (Establishment), Gopalganj, by instituting
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
8/11
departmental proceeding against him.
10. Having considered the submission made by the
learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the
records it appears that the petitioner was appointed as a Tola
Sevak in the year 2009 and later on his contract was not
renewed by the respondent authorities. He preferred an appeal
bearing appeal no. 08 of 2018 before the District Appellate
Authority, Gopalganj and the same was allowed vide order
dated 08.05.2024. Despite order dated 08.05.2024, the contract
of the petitioner was not renewed. It appears from the Bihar
State Teaching Institutions Teachers and Employees (Dispute,
Redressal and Appeal) Rules 2020 that Rule 16 gives power to
impose punishment upon the person concerned, in case of
noncompliance of the order/direction or in case of any
complaint by the party for compliance of the order.
11. In the considered opinion of this Court, since in
the Act itself a provision has been made for compliance of the
order, it is incumbent upon the petitioner to avail the remedy
before the appropriate authority, before approaching this
Hon’ble Court for the reliefs sought for in the present writ
petition.
12. It further appears from the judgment/order relied
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
9/11
upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said
orders have been passed without considering Rule 16 of the
Bihar State Teaching Institutions Teachers and Employees
(Dispute, Redressal and Appeal) Rules 2020, since the same
were not brought to the notices of the Co-ordinate Benches. In
the opinion of this Court, the orders dated 19.08.2025 passed in
CWJC no. 13018 of 2025 (Raju Yadav Vs. The State of Bihar
& Ors.) , order dated 20.04.2026 passed in CWJC no. 2920 of
2026 (Kumari Rashmi Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) and
order dated 07.07.2026 passed in CWJC no. 9258 of 2026
(Shilpi @ Silpi Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) are per
incuriam, in view of the ratio decided by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in the case reported in 2003 5 SCC 448 (State of
Bihar Vs. Kalika Kuer @ Kalika Singh & Ors.) wherein the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in paragraph no. 10 has
observed as follows:
"10. Looking at the matter, in view
of what has been held to mean by per incuriam,
we find that such element of rendering a
decision in ignorance of any provision of the
statute or the judicial authority of binding
nature, is not the reason indicated by the Full
Bench in the impugned judgment, while saying
that decision in the case of Ramkrit Singh was
rendered per incuriam. On the other hand, it
was observed that in the case of Ramkrit Singh
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
10/11
the Court did not consider the question as to
whether the Consolidation Authorities are
courts of limited jurisdiction or not. In
connection with this observation, we would like
to say that an earlier decision may seem to be
incorrect to a Bench of a coordinate jurisdiction
considering the question later, on the ground
that a possible aspect of the matter was not
considered or not raised before the court or
more aspects should have been gone into by the
court deciding the matter earlier but it would
not be reason to say that the decision was
rendered per incuriam and liable to be ignored.
The earlier judgment may seem to be not correct
yet it will have the binding effect on the later
Bench of coordinate jurisdiction. Easy course of
saying that earlier decision was rendered per
incuriam is not permissible and the matter will
have to be resolved only in two ways either to
follow the earlier decision or refer the matter to
a larger Bench to examine the issue, in case it is
felt that earlier decision is not correct on merits.
Though hardly necessary, we may however, refer
to a few decisions on the above proposition."
13. Similar issue has already been disposed by this
Court vide its order dated 30.06.2026 passed in CWJC no. 9132
of 2026 (Nisha @ Nisha Kumari Vs. The State of Bihar &
Ors.) , wherein after considering the orders relied upon by the
learned counsel for the petitioner passed by the learned
Coordinate Benches of this Court and by referring to Rule 16 of
Patna High Court CWJC No.15876 of 2026 dt.26-10-2026
11/11
the Bihar Teaching Institutions Teachers & Employees (Dispute,
Redressal & Appeal) Rules 2020, proceeded to dismiss the writ
petition with a liberty to petitioner to avail the remedy as
available to him under law and further directed the State
Authorities to take steps for appointment of Chairman/Member
of the District Teachers Appellate Authority at the earliest,
preferably within a period of 4 months.
14. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed
of with the same direction as directed by order dated 30.06.2026
passed in CWJC no. 9132 of 2026 that the petitioner will avail
the remedy as available to him under law and the State
Authorities will take steps for appointment of the
Chairman/Member of the District Teachers Appellate Authority
at the earliest, preferably within the period as directed in order
dated 30.06.2026 passed in CWJC no. 9132 of 2026.
15. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
vinita/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 28.10.2026
Transmission Date