Patna High Court

Uttam KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 29 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: AJIT KUMAR

Holding

The Court held that the retrospective cancellation of the petitioners' promotions and the subsequent promotion orders issued during the pendency of judicial stays were ultra‑vires and set aside, directing the authorities to finalize the seniority list after due objections and to grant promotions in compliance with the Bihar Collectorate Clerical Service Rules.

Summary

The petitioners, appointed on compassionate grounds as Class‑IV clerks, were promoted to Class‑III in March 2018 following a High Court directive, but their promotions were later cancelled in July 2023 to accommodate three private respondents. The petitioners challenged the retrospective cancellation, arguing it violated natural‑justice principles, the applicable Bihar Collectorate Clerical Service Rules (2011 and 2013 amendments), and judicial stays issued by the Supreme Court and the High Court. The State argued the cancellations were necessary administrative rectifications to comply with seniority‑cum‑eligibility quotas and that the petitioners had not exhausted statutory appeal remedies. The Court examined whether a promotion already vested could be undone without due process and whether actions taken during a judicial stay were lawful. It held that the cancellation orders were ultra‑vires, set aside the impugned orders, and directed the Regional Deputy Director of Education to finalize the seniority list after hearing objections and to process promotions in accordance with the statutory rules. Both writ petitions were disposed of with detailed directions for proper promotion procedures.

Issues considered

Whether a retrospective cancellation of a vested promotion without audi alteram partem violates natural‑justice and constitutional principles.
Whether administrative action taken in defiance of a Supreme Court and High Court stay is legally valid.
Whether seniority for Group ‘D’ employees must be determined by a finalised seniority list prepared under the Bihar Collectorate Clerical Service Rules.
Whether the petitioners exhausted the statutory remedy of filing an appeal before the Regional Deputy Director of Education.

Legislation cited

Bihar Service Code — s. Rule 103
Constitution of India — s. Art.14, Art.309

Subjects

promotion
seniority
natural justice
judicial stay
administrative law
Bihar Collectorate Clerical Service Rules
contempt of court
status quo

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2163 of 2019
======================================================
1. Uttam Kumar and Ors Late Sunil kumar resident of Village and Post Office
Aiyara, P.S-Karpi, District Arwal presently posted at Anani Shu Ucch
vidyalaya, Pali Bazar Jehanabad
2. Mirtunjay Kumar Late Ram Dayal Sharma resident of Senari P.S- Karpi
District- Arwal Presently Posted at 10 plus 2 Praveshika Vidyalaya,
Shakurabad, Jehanabad
3. Rajendra Kumar Shri Baliram Sharma resident of Village- Senari, P.S-
Karpi, District- Arwal, Presently posted at Gandhi Samarak inter Vidyalaya,
Jehanabad
4. Kulshekhar Sharma Suryadeo Singh resident of village majidpur, P.S-
Kinjer, District- arwal, Presently posted at Gandhi Samarak inter Vidyalaya
Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, EDucation Department, Government ofBihar Patna
Bihar
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna Bihar
4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education,Magadh Division, Gaya Bihar
5. The District Magistrate, Jehanabad Bihar
6. The Distict Education Officer, Jehanabad Bihar
7. Brajesh Kumar Late Suresh Singh resident of village- jhunathi Khurd Post-
Jhunathi P.S-Parasbigha, District- Jehanabad
8. Mahendra Ram Late Ramdev Ram resident of village and post-Bharthu P.S-
Ghoshi District- Jehanabad, Presently posted at Ramanand Sharma Project
kanya Higher Secondary School, Okari, Ghosshi, Jehanabad
9. Sushma kumari late Ramdahin Mahto resident of village- Maliksarai post
and P.S-Islampur District- Nalanda, presently posted at plus 2 High School,
Murgaun, Jehanabad
10. Praveen Kumar Jaynandan Singh resident of village Senari, post- Khatangi
P.S- Karpi (Vanshsi) District- Arwal , presently posted at plus 2High School,
hulasganj, Jehanabad
11. Sahjanand Sharma late Dashrath Sharma resident of village, post and P.S-
Rampur Chauram District- Arwal, presently posted at High School,
Makhdumpur, Jehanabad
12. Sarita Kumari late umesh kumar Singh village-Pariyari bigha Post- Pariyari
Dhig P.S- Kinjar, District- Arwal, Presently Posted at Gandhi Inter School
krishna Ashram Sikaria, District- Jehanabad
13. Lalan paswan Late Munshi Paswan resident of mohalla Purvi Unhta,P.S, P.O
and District- Jehanabad, presently posted at Gandhi praveshika School,
krishnaashram,Bhenvad Sikaria, Jehanabad now posted at Rajkiyakrit High
School, Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
2/43

14. Mrinal Manjari Late Niraj Kumar resident of village Senari post- Khatangai
P.S- Karpi (Vanshi) District- arwal Presently at plus 2 High School
Badhauna, Jehanabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10483 of 2023
======================================================
1. Uttam Kumar Son of Late Sunil Kumar Resident of Village and P.O.-
Aiyara, P.S.- Karpi, District- Arwal.
2. Mritunjay Kumar Son of Late Ramdayal Sharma, Resident of Village-
Senari, P.S.- Karpi, District- Arwal.
3. Rajendra Kumar Son of Sri Baliram Sharma, Resident of Village- Senari,
P.S.- Karpi, District- Arwal.

... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Additional Chief Secretary, Education
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, District- Jehanabad.
5. The District Education Officer, District- Jehanabad.
6. The District Programme Officer Establishment, District- Jehanabad.
7. The District Secondary Education Establishment Committee through its
Chairman, District- Jehanabad.
8. Smt. Sushma Kumar, Wife of not known to the petitioners, at present posted
as class-III employee at Project Kanya High School- Okari, District-
Modanganj.
9. Smt. Anjani Kumari, Wife of not known to the petitioners, at present posted
as class-III employee at Gandhi Smakrak High School- Sagarpur, District-
Makhdumpur.
10. Sh. Praveen Kumar, Son of not known to the petitioners, at present posted as
class-III employee at High School- Bharthu, District- Ghoshi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2163 of 2019 & CWJC No. 10483 of 2023)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Vardaan Mangalam, Adv.
Ms. Ritika Rani, Adv.
Mr.Arvind Kumar Sharma
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madhaw Pd. Yadav, GP-23
Mr. Shankar Kumar Thakur, AC to GP-27
: Mr. Arvind Kumar, AC to GP-23
For the Respondents 8 to 10 : Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate.
======================================================
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
3/43

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
CAV ORDER/ JUDGMENT

29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

counsel appearing for Respondents-State in the both the writ

petitions.

2. Vide order dated 08.02.2024 passed in CWJC No.

2163 of 2019, the instant case was directed to be listed along

with CWJC No. 10483 of 2023, after service of notice and since

both these cases have common subjects in issue, as such on

completion of pleadings of the parties including the private

respondents, these matters have been heard together and on

conclusion of the arguments of all the parties, accordingly, both

the writ petitions are being adjudicated in the following manner.

3. The relief sought for in CWJC No. 2163 of 2019 is

as follows:-

“(i) For quashing the office order
vide Memo No. 574 dated 26.6.2018 issued
by The Regional Deputy Director of
Education, Magadh Division, Gaya as
contained in Annexure-13 by which direction
has been issued to the District Education
Officer, Gaya to prepare the Gradation List
of Class IV employees and grant promotion
to the eligible persons from Class IV to Class
Ill indicating the seniority of the petitioners
viz private respondents;
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
4/43

(ii) Also for issuance of a writ in
the nature of declaration that the decision
taken by the Regional Deputy Director of
Education, Magadh Division, Gaya dated
26.6.2018 as contained in Annexure-13 is
contrary to the order dated 16.5.2018 passed
by the Hon’ble Patna High Court in
C.W.J.C.No. 5912 of 2018 as contained in
Annexure- mainly on the reasons once the
Hon’ble Patna High Court pleased to direct
the Regional Deputy Director of Education,
Magadh Division, Gaya to take decision
upon the recommendation made by the
District Education Officer for promotion
from Class IV to Class III in which the name
of the private respondent does not appear;
(iii) Also for direction to the
respondents to not give effect of the office
order vide Memo No. 574 dated 26.6.2018 as
contained in Annexure-13 against the
petitioner specially when their juniors have
already been promoted from Class IV to
Class III.
iv) And also for necessary
direction, relief, order as the petitioners are
found entitled to in the facts and
circumstances of the case and eye of law.

4. The relief sought for in CWJC No. 10483 of 2023
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
5/43

is as follows:-

“ (i) For quashing the
Office order vide memo no.1914 dated
07/07/23 issued under the signature of
District Education Officer, District-
Jehanabad as contained in Annexure-
22, by which the Smt. Sushma Kumar,
respondent no.8, Smt. Anjani Kumari,
respondent no.9, and Sh. Praveen
Kumar, respondent no.10 have been
promoted from class IV to III clerk
and posted in Project Kanya High
School- Okari, District-Modanganj,
Gandhi Smakrak High School-
Sagarpur, District-Makhdumpur,
Project Kanya High School, District-
Makhdumpur and High School-
Bharthu, District-Ghoshi respectively
after cancelling of order dated
16/03/18 with retrospective effect as
contained in Annexure-13.
(ii). Also, commanding the
respondents to allow the petitioners to
continue working as class-III
employee in their respective place of
posting as usual in view of the order
dated 16/03/18 as contained in
Annexure-13, after giving no effect to
the order mentioned with respect to
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
6/43

Rajendra Kumar, respondent no.3.
(iii). Also for quashing the
proceeding and decision of the
District Establishment/Promotion
Committee, Jehanabad dated 07/07/23
as contained in Annexure-21, held
under the Chairmanship of the District
Education Officer, District-Jehanabad
by which the order no.555 dated
16/03/18 as contained in Annexure-13,
was cancelled and the private
respondents and the petitioner no.3
were promoted from 7/7/23 as
contained in Annexure-22.
(iv). Also for necessary
relief/reliefs, order/orders,
direction/directions for which the
petitioner is entitled in the eye of
law.”

FACTUAL MATRIX IN BOTH THE CASES

5. The petitioners were appointed on compassionate

ground on Class-IV post, owing to the deceased employees, who

happened to be the father of these petitioners, said to have been

killed in the extremist’s carnage known as ‘Senari Carnage’ in

the night of 18.03.1999. Since, these petitioners had the

requisite qualification for being appointed on compassionate
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
7/43

ground, their appointments were directed on the

recommendation of the District Compassionate Committee, by

following requisite procedures as prescribed in law by issuing

appointment letters against which the petitioners are said to have

joined the respective posts. At the time of their appointment, the

petitioners had passed their matriculation examination and

subsequently, with the permission of the District Education

Officer, Jehanabad, they are said to have pursued further studies

and accordingly, petitioner no.1, Uttam Kumar is said to have

completed his Graduation in 2011, while petitioner no. 2,

Mritunjay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Rajendra Kumar of both

the writ petitions, completed their Intermediate qualification in

2014 and 2004 respectively. And additionally, all these three

petitioners are said to have obtained diplomas in computer

application (DCA) from valid institutions, the certificates issued

are appended as Annexure-1 Series of CWJC No. 10483 of

2023. The promotion of the petitioners from Class-IV to Class-

III posts is governed by several administrative frameworks and

rules, being Bihar Secretariat Clerical Service Rules, 2006 as

referred in Memo No. 7443 dated 30.06.2011, which

formulated the promotion procedures appended as

Annexure-2 of the CWJC No:10483/2023, got amended and
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
8/43

was being called as the Bihar Secretariat Clerical Service Cadre

(Recruitment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2011 (for short

“Rules, 2011”) which initially established the base-line for

recruitment and promotion under which, Rule 7(5) of the “Rules

2011” stipulated that 85% of posts belonging to Lower Division

Clerk (LDC) were to be filled up through direct recruitment,

while 15% were earmarked for being filled up from amongst the

eligible Group ‘D’ employees having matriculation

qualification. In exercise of power under Article 309 of

Constitution of India, Rules for recruitment and service

condition was framed, which is known as Bihar Collectorate

Clerical Cadre (Recruitment and Service Condition) Rule 2011

and under the Rule 6(1) of the “Collectorate Rules 2011”

required matriculation with knowledge of computer application.

The said Rule was further amended in the year 2013 and all the

visible features of the earlier “Rules 2011” was fundamentally

found altered vide Notification No. 14227 dated 2nd September,

2013, which introduced the Bihar Collectorate Clerical Cadre

(Amendment) Rules, 2013 (For short ‘ Rules 2013’), and

substituted the Rule 6(1) mandating that the minimum

educational qualification for the clerical cadre would be an

intermediate pass (10+2) or equivalent along with the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
9/43

knowledge of computer operation and computer typing. The

Bihar Collectorate Clerical Cadre (Recruitment & Service

Conditions) Rules, 2011, which clarified that 15% posts must be

filled up in seniority order from such Group ‘D’, who possesses

the qualification required for clerical posts and consequently,

after September, 2013, no Group “D” employee could have

legally been promoted to Class-III post, unless they possess both

the intermediate degree and the computer certificates (which

would mean knowledge of computer application and computer

typing). The said Rule, 2011 further provides that compassionate

appointee shall be junior to the direct recruits.

Stand of the petitioners.

6. The petitioners’ case is that they obtained this

technical qualification prior to 2017-2018 promotion cycle and

were amongst the few employees, who strictly adhered to

updated statutory standards, which were brought into effect with

fundamental amendments in the Bihar Collectorate Clerical

Cadre (Recruitment & Service Conditions) (Amendment) Rules,

2013, which were framed in the year 2011. It is the case of the

petitioners that since the administrative machinery of the

Department of Education in the district of Jehanabad under

which these petitioners are said to have been working, having
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
10/43

failed to initiate the procedures of promotion on the post of

Class-III from group ‘D’ employees, these petitioners were

compelled to file the writ petition bearing CWJC No. 17793 of

2016, wherein, it was submitted that the petitioners fulfilled the

requisite criteria/qualification for their cases to be considered for

promotion from Class-IV to Class-III post, on which they are

presently working and the authorities have also done a

preliminary screening and the list has also been prepared which

has been submitted by the concerned District Education Officer,

Jehanabad to the office of Regional Deputy Director of

Education, Magadh Division, Gayaji and now the authorities are

only to take a final decision based on such recommendation,

which for no obvious reason, appropriate decisions was not been

taken giving reasons to file such petition.

7. Considering the submission of the petitioners, the

Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 05.12.2017 passed

in CWJC No. 17793 of 2016, was pleased to direct the

authorities concerned to “take a final decision on the

recommendation made by Respondent No.6 relating to

promotion of the person including the petitioners on the post of

Class-III from Class-IV”, in which these petitioners are said to

be working and accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
11/43

for taking such decision within a period of two months.

8. It has further been brought to the notice of this

Court that pursuant to the judicial mandate, the District

Administration initiated rigorous verification process by issuing

letter no.627 dated 20th May, 2017 (issued under the signature of

District Education Officer, Jehanabad) for collection of details

of all intermediate passed Group ‘D’ employees in the district of

Jehanabad and accordingly, a final merit list is said to have been

prepared on 22 July, 2017, after completing the process of

seeking details and other formalities, the final merit list was

published, in which the name of the petitioner no.1 stands at

Serial No.10, petitioner no.2 stands at Serial No. 6, petitioner

no. 3 stands at Serial No. 4.

9. It has next been submitted that pursuant to the

check list prepared by District Education Officer, Jehanabad on

22.07.2017, the final gradation list is said to have been prepared

and published in which, the private respondents, namely,

Sushma Kumari, Anjani Kumari and Praveen Kumar have not

been shown to have acquired the knowledge of computer

operation and computer typing. Vide letter no. 262 dated

08.02.2018 issued under the signature of District Programme

Officer, Jehanabad addressed to all school Heads of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
12/43

Government School were directed that all the desired candidates

for the promotion from Class-IV to Class-III would present

themselves with educational qualification including computer

operation and computer typing certificates along with original

service books, before District Establishment Promotion

Committee for consideration of their cases for promotion. These

petitioners are said to have appeared before the District

Establishment Promotion Committee on 17.02.2018 along with

all certificates as required under the Bihar Collectorate Clerical

Service Cadre (Recruitment and Service Conditions) Rules,

2011 and the Amendment Rules, 2013 and were further directed

to make signature over the proceedings and accordingly, a

decision was taken on 17.02.2018 for promotion of these

petitioners from Class-IV to Class-III in the light of the order

passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in CWJC NO. 17793 of 2016

and the District Establishment Committee having resolved that

these petitioners were having requisite qualification in terms of

the Bihar Collectorate Clerical Service Cadre (Recruitment and

Service Conditions) Rules, 2011 and the Amendment Rules,

2013 and pursuant thereto, in the meeting of District

Establishment Posting Committee under Chairmanship of

District Education Officer held on 16.03.2018, the petitioners
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
13/43

were promoted from Class-IV to Class-III, vide office Memo

No. 555 dated 16.03.2018 issued by the District Education

Officer, Jehanabad, by which these petitioners were posted on

promotion from Class-IV to Class-III in the respective schools,

details of which is indicated in para-19 of the writ petition being

CWJC No. 10483 of 2023 and the petitioners are said to have

joined the respective post of Class-III on 17.03.2018.

10. The petitioners by referring to the check list dated

22.07.2017 issued under the signature of District Education

Officer, Jehanabad appended as Annexure-14 of CWJC No.

10483 of 2023 submits that from the said list, it is quite apparent

that only petitioner no. 1, 2 and 3 and one Kulshekhar Sharma,

who is said to have died on 05.02.2023, were eligible for

promotion under Bihar Collectorate Clerical Service Cadre

(Recruitment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2011, (Amendment

Rules, 2013) as no other employees of final seniority list dated

22.07.2017 prepared on the basis of integrated inquiry report

dated 22.07.2017 had the knowledge of computer operation and

computer typing and therefore, only these petitioners were

granted promotion and even after grant of promotion, nobody

including the private respondents had ever objected to such

promotions rather they simply filed a writ petition bearing
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
14/43

CWJC No. 5912 of 2018, wherein the only submission was

made before the Co-ordinate Bench that their

case is covered by the decision rendered in the case of these

petitioners, who are said to have filed the writ petition for grant

of promotion vide CWJC No. 17793 of 2016 and considering

the submissions made in the writ petition filed by the private

respondents, the same was disposed of with a direction to the

Respondent No.4/Regional Deputy Director, Education, Gayaji,

to examine the claim of these petitioners and if it is found that

the present case is covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate

Bench in CWJC No. 17793 of 2016, the Respondent No.4 may

consider the case of the petitioners in the light of order dated

05.12.2017 and the exercise so required for consideration of the

cases of private respondents, would be considered within the

time line so prescribed in the order dated 16.05.2018 passed in

CWJC No. 5912 of 2018. With such observations, the writ

petition was disposed of.

11. It is the case of the petitioners that the private

respondents being Respondents No. 8, 9 and 10 had never made

any complaint either before the district authorities or at any

other higher forum including the aforesaid writ petition

preferred by them which is said to have been disposed of by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
15/43

Co-ordinate Bench, wherein such allegations have been made

that despite these private respondents having the qualification

for promotion, their eligibility was compromised in granting

promotions to these petitioners.

12. During the course of hearing, the private

respondents no. 8 to 10 were directed to file their counter

affidavit in this case and through second counter affidavit filed

in this case on behalf of private respondents 8 to 10, it has been

asserted that the respondents no. 8 to 10 had submitted their

requisite qualification about the knowledge of computer

operation in the office of Respondent No.5 on 11.08.2018, upon

which initials were made by the authorized person, while

receiving the papers for their promotion as Class-III employees

but those papers have not been included in the list prepared by

Respondent No.5, as such, the name of these private

respondents, could not be considered in the list of promotion.

13. It has next been asserted that it is an admitted

fact which would emerge from the order passed by the Regional

Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Division, Gayaji as

contained in Memo No. 574 dated 26.06.2018 that these private

respondents do have the computer knowledge of operation and

typing and they deserve to be promoted as Class-III employees.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
16/43

14. From the order dated 26.06.2018 passed by

Regional Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Division,

Gayaji, it is quite evident that though there is a finding with

regard to the computer knowledge with respect to the private

respondents but there is no consideration of the fact that as to

why, if such knowledge was acquired by these private

respondents way back in the year 2014 itself, as mentioned in

the certificates produced through affidavit, then what prevented

them from not producing such certificates or during course of

preparation of merit list dated 22.07.2017, having made such

protest before the District Promotion Committee and as also,

such qualification having not been indicated in the form, which

was to be filled up by them based on which, final/seniority

gradation list dated 22.07.2017, has been prepared and published

by the District Authority.

15. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

Judicial intervention would be required in this case taking note

of the fact that the cancellation was effected during judicial stay

and the Respondent Authorities did not possess the legal

authority or jurisdictional competence to initiate "administrative

rectification" and issue of demotion orders via Memo No. 1914

under the guise of transparency and quota compliance, while the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
17/43

promotion process of the State was subject to an active Status

Quo order by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and as also under

judicial stay by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court could not

have been give effect.

16. It has further been argued that the justification for

cancellation advanced by respondents during stay is fit to be

rejected, where such stand is taken that the withdrawal of

promotions was a necessary "rectification" to adhere to the 15%

quota Notification No. 821 and to ensure transparency via Letter

No. 195 dated 11.08.2023 and Letter No. 2345 (12.08.2023).

However, these actions were taken despite two critical judicial

interdictions: Supreme Court Stay: On 15.04.2019, the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in SLP No. 30621 of 2011 ordered Status Quo

regarding promotions in the State of Bihar. Co-ordinate Bench

Stay: On 01.04.2019, a stay was granted in MJC No. 2847 of

2018 (arising out of CWJC No. 19114 of 2012). Despite these

stays, the DEO issued the impugned demotion/promotion order

on 07.07.2023 via Memo No. 1914.

Submissions on behalf of Respondent No.5 and 6

17. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 5 and 6

submits that the promotions from Class-IV to Class-III posts in

the district of Jehanabad are strictly governed by the Bihar
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
18/43

Collectorate Clerical Service Cadre (Recruitment and

Service Conditions) Rules, 2011 (Notification No. 821 dated

23.03.2011). These rules mandate a 15% quota for promotion

from the Class-IV cadre. It is submitted that out of a total of 47

sanctioned posts, only seven (7) posts can legally be filled via

promotion. It is further submitted that while the petitioners were

promoted to Class-III posts via Office Order No. 555 dated

16/03/2018 (Annexure-A), this promotion was fundamentally

irregular. Counsel for the respondents contends that the 2018

promotion was granted in haste to ensure compliance with the

directions of this Hon’ble Court in C.W.J.C. No. 17793 of 2016,

and in doing so, the mandatory principle of seniority was

bypassed. This irregularity led to a challenge by senior

employees in C.W.J.C. No. 5912 of 2018 (Brajesh Kumar &

Ors. vs. State of Bihar). By an order dated 16.05.2018, this

Hon’ble Court directed a reconsideration of the entire promotion

process to ensure adherence to law.

18. In light of the judicial intervention in the Brajesh

Kumar case and subsequent contempt proceedings (M.J.C. No.

4408 of 2018), the Regional Deputy Director of Education

(RDDE), Magadh Division, acting as the Appellate Authority,

issued Memo No. 574 dated 26.06.2018 (Annexure-B /
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
19/43

Annexure-R/A).

19. In compliance with those directions and the

seniority list prepared by the Regional Deputy Director of

Education (RDDE), Magadh Division (Memo No. 574 dated

26.06.2018), a fresh administrative exercise was undertaken on

04.10.2018 to rectify the irregular promotion: Further

clarification was sought from the Director, Secondary

Education, Patna vide letter no. 195 dated 11.08.2023 and a

show-cause was submitted by the office vide letter no. 2345

dated 12.08.2023 to ensure full compliance with Government

instructions and judicial order. The District

Establishment/Promotion Committee met to finalize the

promotions on 07/07/2023 (Annexure-21).

20. Following the committee’s decision, the District

Education Officer issued Letter No. 1913 dated 07/07/2023 to

communicate the departmental process, which culminated in the

primary impugned order: Office Order vide Memo No. 1914

dated 07/07/2023 (Annexure-22). By this order, the 2018

promotions of the petitioners were cancelled with retrospective

effect to maintain the 7-posts limit and accommodate senior

eligible candidates (Respondent Nos. 8, 9, and 10). Crucially,

Petitioner No. 3 (Rajendra Kumar) was found eligible under
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
20/43

the revised seniority list and was consequently granted a fresh

promotion effective from 07/07/2023 under the same order.

21. The respondents maintained that these actions

were not arbitrary but were necessary administrative

rectifications to ensure transparency and adherence to the

"seniority-cum-eligibility" principle. It is further argued that the

writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioners failed to

exhaust their statutory remedy by filing an appeal before the

RDDE, Magadh Division, the designated Appellate Authority.

The respondents contend that the 2023 order of promotion were

issued in full compliance with the departmental policies and the

previous mandates of this Hon'ble Court.

22. Learned counsel for the respondents by referring

to their stand taken by them in their counter affidavit submits

that the initial promotion of the petitioners via Memo No. 555

dated 16.03.2018 was an irregular action necessitated by the

urgency of complying with the High Court's order in CWJC No.

17793 of 2016 dated 05.12.2017, which resulted in a failure to

strictly adhere to seniority rules. The specific stand so taken in

the counter affidavit filed by them, wherein with regard to the

promotion of these petitioners as well as subsequent promotions,

which is subject matter of challenge in this case, are being
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
21/43

reproduced as under:-

….... 5. That in pursuance of the order dated
05.12.2017 passed by the Hon'ble High
Court in CWJC No. 17793 of 2016 (Uttam
Kumar & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors.), the
Regional Deputy Director of Education,
Magadh Division, directed the District
Education Officer, Jehanabad, to take
necessary steps regarding promotion from
Class-IV to Class-III posts.
6. That accordingly, the District Education
Officer, Jehanabad, vide Memo No. 555
dated 16.03.2018, promoted certain
employees including the petitioner, without
considering seniority due to the urgency of
compliance.

7. That in compliance of the aforesaid order,
the RDDE, Magadh Division, vide Memo
No. 574 dated 26.06.2018, prepared a fresh
list of eligible candidates strictly based on
seniority, which was later communicated to
this office.

8. That the withdrawal of the promotion was
therefore not arbitrary, but in strict
conformity with the Hon'ble Court's
directions, departmental circulars, and the
principle of seniority-cum-eligibility.

Underlined by me

23. Learned counsel for the Respondents by referring

to the stand so taken submits that their actions rescinding the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
22/43

promotions granted to the writ petitioners cannot be said to be

without jurisdiction inasmuch as when there was specific

direction by the Co-ordinate Bench to consider the cases of writ

petitioners of CWJC No. 5912 of 2018 (Writ petition of Private

Respondents No. 8 to 10) which order had necessitated for

undertaking fresh process of promotion and the authorities were

compelled to take a call by interfering with the promotions

which is said to have been cancelled insofar these petitioners are

concerned and further the promotions which is said to have been

granted after cancellation of promotions vide order dated

07.07.2023 cannot be said to be without jurisdiction.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PRIVATE RESPONDENTS 8, 9, 10.

24. Learned counsel for Private Respondent Nos. 8,

9, and 10 submits that these respondents are fully qualified for

promotion to Class-III posts, having timely submitted their

educational and computer qualification certificates to the office

of the District Education Officer, Jehanabad (Respondent No. 5).

It is submitted that following a notification issued on 20.05.2017

calling for qualifications, the private respondents submitted their

credentials; however, their names were intentionally omitted

from the promotion panel or marked with "Nil" in the special
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
23/43

knowledge column.

25. The private respondents contend that this

omission was the result of a deliberate and mala fide act.

Specifically, it is alleged that Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were

posted on deputation in the office of Respondent No. 5 between

2016 and 2018. During this tenure, the petitioners allegedly

acted in connivance with the departmental authorities to

manipulate the seniority records, ensuring the exclusion of the

private respondents to facilitate the petitioners' own irregular

promotions in March 2018.

26. The learned counsel further highlights the

appellate order passed by the Regional Deputy Director of

Education (RDDE), Magadh Division, dated 26.06.2018

(Annexure-18). In the said order, the Appellate Authority

specifically held that Respondent Nos. 8 to 10 possess the

necessary educational and computer knowledge certificates and

are legally entitled to be promoted as Class-III employees. This

finding by the RDDE effectively refutes the petitioners' claim

that these respondents lacked the requisite qualifications at the

time the seniority list was finalized. It is further submitted, as

evidenced by Annexure R/1, that the private respondents'
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
24/43

computer qualification certificates and applications were duly

acknowledged and received by the department as early as

11.08.2018. Despite these documents being on record, the

official respondents initially failed to include them in the

roster/panel prepared for promotions, an administrative failure

that was only corrected through the subsequent proceedings of

the year, 2023.

27. The core submission on behalf of the private

respondents is that their eventual promotion via the impugned

order dated 07.07.2023 is legally sound and restores the rightful

"seniority-cum-eligibility" criteria. While the private

respondents state they have no objection to the promotion of the

petitioners if they are found to be deserving, they maintain that

such promotions cannot be granted by displacing or

compromising the established legal rights and superior seniority

of Respondent Nos. 8, 9, and 10. They argue that the 2023

administrative action was a necessary corrective measure to

undo the previous manipulations and comply with the RDDE's

appellate directions.

REPLY OF THE PETITIONERS TO THE PRIVATE
RESPONDENTS.

28. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in response to
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
25/43

the contentions of the private respondents, submits that

Respondent Nos. 8, 9, and 10 fundamentally lack the mandatory

qualifications of Intermediate and Computer Operation/Typing

as prescribed under the Bihar Collectorate Clerical Service

(Amendment) Rules, 2013 (Annexure-P/6). It is contended

that while the petitioners’ certificates were duly verified and

found valid by the District Programme Officer (Establishment)

(Annexure-P/13 & P/14 series), the private respondents failed

to produce any such credentials during the actual selection

process conducted between 2017 and 2018.

29. It is submitted that the official records clearly

demonstrate the ineligibility of the private respondents at the

relevant time. Specifically, Respondent No. 10 left the "special

knowledge" column blank in his application and has not

enclosed certificate of the typing/computer operation

(Annexure-P/15, pg. 74), and Respondent No. 8 merely

mentioned having "17 years of experience" without enclosing

any valid computer certificate. Furthermore, it is alleged that

Respondent No. 9 failed to even submit an application in

response to the departmental notices dated 20.05.2017

(Annexure-P/8) and 08.02.2018 (Annexure-P/10). The

petitioners argue that the computer certificates now being relied
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
26/43

upon by the private respondents are "anti-dated" and

manufactured documents, created only after the petitioners were

legally promoted on 16.03.2018. This is corroborated by a letter

no. 1049 dated 19.06.2018 (Annexure-P/27), wherein the then

District Education Officer informed the RDDE that only the

petitioners and one other individual possessed the requisite

qualifications.

30. The learned counsel further contends that the

impugned orders dated 07.07.2023 (Annexure-P/21 & P/22) are

a nullity in the eyes of law. It is argued that these orders were

passed by considering only matriculation qualifications, thereby

disregarding the mandatory statutory requirement of computer

knowledge.

31. Legal issues

1. Whether retrospective cancellation of

promotion after five years, leading to reversion

and loss of vested rights, without adherence to

the principles of natural justice, is sustainable in

law ?

It is a settled principle that any
administrative action entailing civil consequences
(such as demotion or loss of seniority, loss in
salary) must adhere to Audi Alteram Partem. Since,
the petitioners were not given a chance to defend
their 2018 promotions which was cancelled in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
27/43

year, 2023, to grant promotion to private
respondents, the order is procedurally ultra vires
and violates Article 14 of the Constitution. Such
unilateral cancellation deserves to be interfered
with, to do complete justice.
Unless, allegation of fraud or
representation are made for fetching such
promotions, a settled promotion cannot be undone
retrospectively, as such action divests the
promotees from their vested rights.

2. Whether the Administrative Action in Defiance of Judicial Stay can
be justified in law ?

It is a foundational principle of law that any

administrative order passed in violation of a

judicial stay or status quo is a nullity in the eyes of

the law (void ab initio). The Respondents' claim of

good faith or compliance with departmental

circulars to ensure transparency is legally irrelevant

when the Apex Court had frozen the status of the

parties. The act of unilaterally revising the seniority

list and demoting the petitioners during the

subsistence/continuance of these stays, the

authorities have acted without jurisdiction.

"Administrative transparency" cannot be invoked to

override a judicial injunction; doing so constitutes

not only a procedural illegality but also a potential

interference with the administration of justice liable
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
28/43

for initiation of contempt proceedings and

punishment for committing contempt of Court.

3. Whether seniority of the employees in the respective cadre as per the

applicable rules is required to be determined with publication of final

seniority list by resorting to the procedure prescribed for grant of

promotion ?

Under the rule established in M. Pachiappan & Ors

v. S. Markandam & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 926 of

2004, SLP (Civil) Nos. 18811-18820 of 2004,

legality and validity of a final seniority list, "holds

the field" unless specifically challenged or

administratively/judicially interfered and continues

to govern the parties, if it has been finalized by

following the due procedure of law. Since from the

records, it does not appear that objections were

invited from the employees concerned before

finalizing the seniority list of 2017 or even the rules

of reservation as applicable for granting promotion

to the Government employee as per the

constitutional scheme does not appear to have been

adhered, therefore, the subsequent seniority list,

which till date has also remained as provisional
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
29/43

could not have been relied for cancellation of

promotion and granting fresh promotion, rather

should be finalized after inviting objections from

all concerned, and upon adjudication of their

objection, the said provisional seniority list should

be given its finality by publishing the final merit

list to show its validity, and only thereafter, the

promotion of all eligible persons be placed for

consideration before the Departmental Promotion

Committee followed with promotional order being

put in place in accordance with rules in vogue.

Consideration

32. On consideration of the submission of the

petitioners, private respondents including the stand taken by the

official-respondents in this case, it is quite clear that there has

been a breach of principles of natural justice, while interfering

with the promotions, which is said to have been granted in

favour of these petitioners, by preparing the seniority list, which

is said to have been finalized after seeking documents, which

were essential for preparation of merit list and further by

providing all the opportunity to all concerned including the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
30/43

private respondents but from the record, it does not appear that

objections were invited from the employees of the cadre before

finalizing the said seniority list to give the shape of final

seniority list, and when the private respondents having filed the

writ petition seeking grant of promotion in similar terms as that

has been extended in favor of these petitioners and the writ

petition having been disposed of with a direction that if the case

of the private respondents is covered by the order passed by the

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2017

passed in CWJC No. 17793 of 2016 filed at the instance of the

writ petitioners, then the cases of other similarly situated

persons shall also be considered and promotion if any, shall be

granted within the time so specified.

33. It is admitted position on record that ignoring the

final seniority list of 2017, which is said to have been prepared

in accordance with the applicable rules governing the service

conditions of Group ‘D’ employees of the district, in which the

petitioners were found eligible, while the private respondents

having not been found eligible, the promotions to these

petitioners were granted but without following the principles of

natural justice or having show-caused these petitioners to file

their responses/objections, before cancellation of promotion vide
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
31/43

impugned orders dated 26.06.2018 whereby the District

Authorities, were directed to prepare a fresh gradation list, and

to promote the eligible persons of Class-IV employees based on

which, the District Establishment Committee met on

07.07.2023, and on the basis of their recommendation, the

promotions of these petitioners were cancelled vide order as

contained in Memo No. 1914 dated 07.07.2023 appended as

Annexure-13 of (CWJC No. 2163 of 2019) and 07.07.2023 as

contained Annexures-21 and 22 (CWJC No. 10483 of 2023) and

the preparation of the provisional seniority list of year 2018

without rescinding the final seniority list, which has already

been put in place by the authorities of the District, based on

which, the promotions to the private respondents and others are

said to have been granted and the authorities without bringing

finality to the said provisional list, by resorting to the procedures

prescribed in law, in which the objections which are said to have

been filed by the different employees, having till date not even

been adjudicated, still proceeded to grant promotion based on

the said provisional list of 2018, just to show compliance in the

contempt proceeding initiated at the instance of the private

respondents by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court to avert

such contempt proceeding likely to be drawn against them, have
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
32/43

shown compliance by cancelling the appointment of these

petitioners in violation of the principles of natural justice and as

also the relevant rules of the Bihar Collectorate Clerical Service

Cadre (Recruitment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2013, is

wholly unsustainable and cannot be justified in law and further

the stand so taken and reason assigned by the respondents for

cancellation of promotions of these petitioners, that for showing

compliance in the contempt proceedings, the promotions

admittedly were granted in haste, which cannot be accepted,

because the respondents for justifying the promotion of 2023

have reiterated the similar stand that just to show compliance in

the contempt proceedings by the private respondents, the

promotions were granted to them based on the provisional

seniority list, which till date have not been finalized, as is

evident from the pleadings placed on the records of the case. It

is surprising that for no prudent reason, the State has come out

with provisional seniority list within a period of 01 year 03

months, while there was no occasion for them to publish such

provisional list, when according to them the seniority list of

Group ‘D’ employees had already been finalized. While there is

nothing on record to show that procedures were followed before

finalization. According to the Respondents, the provisional
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
33/43

seniority list dated 04.10.2018 is prepared as per the applicable

rules, to settle the seniority which is contained in Memo No.

2003 dated 04.10.2018, as such, the same is required to be made

final for the purpose of granting promotions under the

prescribed quota from Group-IV to Group-III, by resorting to

the procedure as prescribed in law, which has been indicated in

the preceding paragraphs to hold such promotions to be duly

sanctioned in law.

34. From the stand so taken in their counter affidavit,

it is quite evident that the authorities without applying their

judicious minds, just to show compliance of the order passed by

the Co-ordinate Bench, in which the contempt petition was filed

vide MJC No. 4408/2019, the respondents are said to have

proceeded to cancel the promotions of these petitioners, but the

facts remain that whether such actions of cancellation during the

stay directed by the Hon’ble Apex Court and as also by the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court could be sanctified in law. For that,

this Court vide order dated 01.09.2025, 15.09.2025, 18.11.2025,

25.11.2025 and 28.11.2025 issued directions to the State

Counsel by adjourning the cases at their instances to have the

stand/response of the respondents concerned, who are said to

have violated the order of stay granted in respect of promotions
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
34/43

pending SLP No. 30621 of 2011, before Hon’ble Apex Court,

but they chose not to respond on these issues. However, reasons

assigned in the recall petition, does not find mention in the order

impugned for which interlocutory application is said to have

been filed, wherein the reference of pendency of MJC No. 4408

of 2018 is said to have been made and for showing compliance,

the promotion vide order dated 07.07.2023 is said to have been

notified cancelling the promotion of these petitioners, may not

absolve the respondents concerned, from having acted beyond

his jurisdictional competence to grant promotion during the

status quo directed by the Hon’ble Apex Court and as also by

the Co-ordinate Bench. Such stand of the authorities in showing

grounds through affidavit cannot be accepted in view of the

judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of

Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr vs The Chief Election

Commissioner, New Delhi & Ors. reported in AIR 1978 SC

851, where the same is missing from its reasoned order.

35. Since no plausible response is said to have been

received from their end, this Court finds it appropriate to deal

with this aspect/issues separately, which is left open at this

stage. But insofar, as the cancellation of promotions and as also

the directions issued by the Regional Deputy Director of
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
35/43

Education holding the eligibility of private respondents fit for

promotion is concerned, the Regional Deputy Director of

Education, Gayaji has erred in directing the District Education

Officer, Jehanabad to carry out the procedures of promotion

based on the provisional seniority list of the year 2018 prepared

for the purpose of granting promotions to the private

respondents for showing compliance of the order in contempt

proceeding drawn vide MJC No. 4408/2018 is wholly

unacceptable in law, as there has been a complete breach of the

constitutional scheme and as also the statutory provisions.

Taking into account the fact that vide impugned orders of

cancellation of promotion retrospectively, these petitioners are said

to have been demoted and divested of the rights created in them,

which is against the constitutional scheme, and is impermissible in

law and further action of the authorities to grant promotion based

on provisional merit list of 2018, even without adjudicating the

objections filed by the objectors and thereby giving finality to the

tentative list of the year, 2018, this Court finds it appropriate to set

aside the orders as contained in Memo No.574 dated 26.06.2018

issued by Regional Deputy Director of Education, Gayaji

(appended as Annexure-13 of CWJC No. 2163 of 2019) and as

also the follow up action pursuant to which the proceedings of
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
36/43

the Establishment Committee dated 07.07.2023 were drawn and

promotion order as contained in Memo No.1914 dated

07.07.2023 (appended as Annexures-21 and 22 of CWJC No.

10483/2023) respectively are said to have been issued demoting

these petitioners and granting promotions to the private

respondents. Accordingly, the concerned authorities are directed

to carry out the following direction(s) :-

“(i) The Regional Deputy Director of

Education, Magadh Division, Gayaji, Bihar is

directed to issue appropriate directions upon the

District Authorities to finalize the provisional

seniority list dated 03.10.2018, which is contained

in Memo no. 2003 dated 04.10.2018, after

adjudicating the objections of all the employees,

who are said to have filed their objections pursuant

to Memo No. 2003 dated 04.10.2018, if need be,

fresh notice may be issued inviting objections to

ensure fairness by making a rigorous verification of

certificates of all those, against whom, there is an

objection/allegations of manipulation, and frauds

are made on account of such certificates having not

been placed on time and such inquiry may
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
37/43

include/involve direct verification from the issuing

authority/institute from where they are claiming to

have gathered experiences, before publishing the

final seniority list of Group’D’ employees and the

entire exercise for publication of final seniority list,

shall be completed in three months from the date of

production of copy of this order.

(ii) The Regional Deputy Director of

Education, Magadh Division, Gayaji, Bihar, on

finalization and publication of final seniority list,

within the time specified, would direct

consideration of the case of all Group ‘D’

employees, who are found within the zone of

consideration for promotion to Class-III within

15%, quota by placing their cases before

Departmental Promotional Committee/

Establishment Committee to consider the individual

cases of all the eligible employees of Group ‘D’,

who are entitled in terms of the Bihar Collectorate

Clerical Service Cadre (Recruitment and Service

Conditions) Rules, 2011 and amended Rule 2013

and as also following the rules of reservation and
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
38/43

applicable roster published for promotion strictly in

consonance with the constitutional scheme and

entire exercises for grant of promotions to the

eligible persons shall be concluded with a further

period of two months.

(iii) With the setting aside of the

impugned order dated 07.07.2023, by which the

promotions granted to these petitioners were

cancelled, for granting promotion to the private

respondents, by cancelling the promotion granted to

these petitioners vide order no. 555 dated

16.03.2018, will not revive automatically rather the

same is made dependent over the promotions which

are likely to be notified on the recommendation of

the District Establishment, made for granting

promotions to Class-III from amongst the persons

eligible from Class-IV employees, within the time

specified for the purpose of continuity in Class-III

service.

(iv) All promotions granted to Class-III

either on the basis of final seniority list of the year
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
39/43

2017 or based on the provisional seniority list of

the year 2018, within 15% limit, which have been

held to be unsustainable, as such, the persons, who

are working presently on the post of Class-III,

would continue on their posts, without creating any

rights or equity in their favour, and would be

entitled only to receive additional pay not

exceeding 20% of his substantive pay attached to

the post of Class-IV held and salary being received

by them immediately before promotion granted to

them vide letter dated 07.07.2023 in view of Rule 103

of Bihar Service Code and the Government Circular

as contained in Memo no. 1479 dated 30.12.1968, so

long, the issue of promotion is under consideration

before authorities in terms of the order passed by this

Court and final promotions are notified.

(v) The Regional Deputy Director of

Education, Magadh Division, Gayaji, Bihar would

ensure that on the final adjudication of promotional

issues of all the eligible employees being

completed followed with the recommendation of

Departmental Promotion Committee / Establishment
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
40/43

Committee, having culminated into promotional

orders getting notified and the persons, already

promoted on the strength of order dated 16.03.2018

and 07.07.2023, do find place in the said list of

Class-III, their continuity on such post, would

reckon from the date of their respective promotions,

which were granted in their favour at the relevant

time, as no such challenge to the date promotions

of these petitioners has ever been a subject matter

before this Court in any of the proceeding and

accordingly, they would be entitled to salary from

the date of their entitlement.

36. Accordingly, both these writ petitions stand

disposed of with the observations and directions indicated

hereinabove.

37. Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, stands

disposed of in the above terms.

Issues pertaining to initiation of contempt proceeding:

38. From the records, it is quite apparent that the

entire mess is said to have been created by the District
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
41/43

Education Officer, Jehanabad, who is said to have violated the

orders of the General Administration Department as contained in

letter no.5066 dated 11.04.2019, whereby the regular

promotions on all of the posts in the services of the State

Government were stayed in the light of orders of the Hon’ble

Apex Court as also by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Hon’ble

High Court but violating the same, vide impugned order as

contained in Memo No. 1914 dated 07.07.2023, is said to have

been issued in breach of principles of natural justice by

cancelling the promotions, which were granted to these

petitioners in compliance of the direction issued by the Hon’ble

Court on their writ petition being CWJC No. 17793 of 2016.

Since the Director, Secondary Education had already noticed

this fact and directed seeking explanation for such violations

made by the District Education Officer, Jehanabad, as is

apparent from the letter no. 195 dated 11.08.2023, still nothing

is said to have been done at his end and this Court granted

opportunity(s) to these two Government Officials to file their

respective responses with regard to corrective measures taken in

this respect but no such response has been filed by them and

accordingly, this Court is left with no option but to draw adverse

view against them, and as such, this Court is of the opinion that
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
42/43

these two Government Officials being Sri Kanhaiya Prasad

Srivastava, I.A.S, Director, Secondary Education Bihar, Patna

and Sri Vidya Sagar Singh, District Education Officer,

Jehanabad are prima facie in contempt of Court for violating the

directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court and as also the Co-

ordinate Bench and since, there is already a contempt

proceeding pending, which is said to have been drawn/initiated

by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of Arbind Kumar &

Ors vs. State of Bihar & Ors (MJC No. 2847 of 2018), under

similar background/circumstances, where the Government

Officials have been found to have committed gross violation of

the stay orders of the Hon’ble Courts, this Court instead drawing

separate proceedings finds it proper to tag this case with the

aforesaid case, for taking suitable action against these two

persons and accordingly, this Court appropriately directs this

matter to be tagged along with the aforesaid case ((MJC No.

2847 of 2018), for this limited issues, for its consideration and

passing appropriate orders against these two Government

officials, for having violated the direction issued by the Hon’ble

Apex Court dated 15.04.2019 passed in SLP No. 30621 of 2011

and order dated 01.04.2019 passed in MJC No. 2847 of 2018

arising out of CWJC No. 19114 of 2012, after taking necessary
Patna High Court CWJC No.2163 of 2019 dt. 29-01-2026
43/43

permission from the Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

39. At the time of pronouncement of the judgment

and having disclosed the mind to send this matter to be tagged

with the MJC No. 2847 of 2018, a prayer has been made from

the State Counsel to take a lenient view in the matter and

therefore, this Court, after having given a conscious thought in

the background that the decision to cancel the promotion

unilaterally for granting promotions to the employees from the

same cadre, has already been set aside by this Court, therefore,

instead sending this matter to be tagged with the aforesaid case,

for the present, refrains from doing so, by just cautioning the

officers concerned to be more careful and cautious who would

be ensuring such act not being repeated/committed in future.

40. However, the petitioners will always be at liberty

to explore the remedies as provided in law for seeking

intervention in such matters.

perwez (Ajit Kumar, J)
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE 05.01.2026
Uploading Date 30.01.2026
Transmission Date N/A

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…