Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

BRIJNANDAN MAHTO @ BHULETENversusSTATE OF BIHAR

Decided
Disposal
ABATED

Holding

The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed as there is no perversity or illegality in the impugned order.

Summary

Kaminee Kumari appealed against the order rejecting her claim for appointment as an Anganwadi Sevika, alleging that the selected candidate, Sangeeta Kumari, had secured the post using forged certificates. The Single Judge had examined the verification reports from the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) and found the documents genuine, concluding there was no evidence of forgery. On appeal, the State authorities reiterated that the certificates were verified by NIOS and found correct. The High Court, noting the limited scope of interference in a Letters Patent Appeal and finding no perversity or illegality in the lower court's decision, refused to interfere. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and any pending interim applications were disposed of.

Issues considered

  • The validity of the certificates submitted by the selected Anganwadi Sevika, Sangeeta Kumari.
  • Whether the verification process by NIOS was sufficient to establish genuineness of the documents.
  • Whether the lower court's order rejecting the appellant's appointment claim was perverse or illegal.

Subjects

  • Anganwadi Sevika appointment
  • forged certificates
  • document verification
  • Letters Patent Appeal
  • administrative law
  • perverse order

Judgment

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Letters Patent Appeal No.259 of 2025
                                      In
                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2683 of 2025
     ======================================================
     Kaminee Kumari Wife of Chandu Kumar, Resident of Village and P.O.-
     Darsur Tole Math, Ward No.02, P.S.- Warishnagar, District- Samastipur.


                                                                  ... ... Appellant/s
                                        Versus


1.   The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.


2.   The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Samastipur.


3.   The District Programme Officer, Samastipur.


4.   The Child Development Project Officer, Warishnagar, District- Samastipur.


5.   Sangeeta Kumari Wife of Mithilesh Paswan, Resident of Village and P.O.-
     Darsur Tole Math, P.S.- Warishnagar, District- Samastipur.


                                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Appellant/s    :      Mr. Alok Kr. Choudhary, Sr. Adv.
                                   Mr. Surya Narayan Roy, Adv.
                                   Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Adv.
                                   Mr. Kulanand Jha, Adv.
     For the State          :      Mr. Government Advocate (7)
                                   Mr. Abhinav Ashok, AC to GA-7
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
             and
             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
     ORAL JUDGMENT
     (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

      Date : 08-01-2026


                     The Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.259 of 2025 dt.08-01-2026
                                             2/4




         appellant-Kaminee           Kumari        challenging   the   order   dated

         15.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ

         Jurisdiction Case No. 2683 of 2025.

                      2. The appellant filed the said writ petition with a

         direction to set aside the order dated 03.01.2025 passed by the

         Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Samastipur in Anganwari

         Appeal No. 08 of 2024 and order dated 11.01.2024 passed by

         the District Programme Officer, Samstipur in Anganwari Case

         No. 254 of 2018, whereby the claim of the appellant for her

         appointment has been rejected.

                      3. The main ground that has been taken before the

         learned Single Judge while challenging the appointment of

         Respondent No. 5 (Sangeeta Kumari) was that she got selected

         on the post of Anganwari Sevika on the basis of forged and

         fabricated certificate and the authorities have not verified the

         genuineness and truthfulness of the same. However, the Court

         found that the documents produced by the Respondent No. 5

         were duly verified from the issuing authority i.e. N.I.O.S.

         (National Institute of Open Schooling), and the issuing authority

         has categorically certified that both the documents which are

         issued are correct and genuine documents and accordingly the

         report was submitted by the issuing authority, therefore, the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.259 of 2025 dt.08-01-2026
                                             3/4




         learned Single Judge has been pleased to hold that nothing has

         been pointed out by the petitioner to show that the documents

         submitted by the Respondent No. 5 were forged documents.

                      4. In this Letters Patent Appeal, a counter-affidavit has

         been filed by the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 wherein in paragraph

         no. 9, it is stated as follows:-

                                               “That in the meantime certificates of the
                                  selected Sevika, Sangita Kumari were sent for
                                  Verification to the Director, N.I.O.S, Patna and
                                  consequently to the Director, NIOS, NOIDA and
                                  accordingly, verification letters were sent to the
                                  CDPO, Warisnagar and it was found that the
                                  certificates of Sangeeta Kumari (Respondent No.5)
                                  were correct and the CDPO, Warisnagar sent the
                                  said verification reports to the DPO, ICDS,
                                  Samastipur for necessary action.”

                      5. In view of such specific stand taken, we are of the

         view that the submission which was advanced by the learned

         counsel for the appellant before the learned Single Judge that

         the Respondent No. 5 produced forged and fabricated certificate

         and, therefore, she should not have been selected for the post of

         Anganwari Sevika without any basis.

                      6. In view of the limited scope of interference in the

         Letters Patent Appeal, since we find no perversity or illegality in

         the impugned order, we are not inclined to interfere with the

         same.
             Patna High Court L.P.A No.259 of 2025 dt.08-01-2026
                                                          4/4




                                   7. Accordingly, the Letters Patent Appeal stands

                      dismissed.

                                   8. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.




                                                            (Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)


                                                                   (Ritesh Kumar, J)

Ranjan-guddu/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          12.01.2026
Transmission Date       NA


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.