Patna High Court
Sudhanshu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner must first file a detailed representation within a week, after which the Board shall adjudicate the objections within two weeks, thereby disposing the writ application.
Summary
The petitioner, Sudhanshu Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB) to consider his objection form filed through the official portal for the Secondary Teacher Eligibility Test (STET) 2025 and to issue a revised answer key. He alleged that despite providing authoritative answers, he was awarded only 63 marks and that over 30 objections remained unadjudicated, with the principle of normalization not applied. The BSEB contended that the petitioner must first file a detailed representation before the Board can adjudicate the objections. The Court held that the petitioner should be directed to file such a representation within one week, referencing his earlier submission, and that the Board must decide the representation within two weeks. Accordingly, the writ application was disposed without granting a mandamus, with the matter to be resolved on the basis of the forthcoming representation. The order emphasizes procedural compliance before substantive relief can be granted.
Issues considered
- Whether the BSEB is duty-bound to consider the petitioner’s objection form and issue a revised answer key under the STET 2025.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the Board to adjudicate the objections and apply normalization.
- Whether the petitioner must first file a detailed representation before the Board can entertain the objections.
Subjects
- STET
- objection form
- mandamus
- normalization
- Bihar School Examination Board
- writ jurisdiction
- education
- answer key
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1754 of 2026
======================================================
Sudhanshu Kumar Son of Awadhesh Sharma, Resident of Village and Post-
Aranda, P.S.-Obra, District-Aurangabad, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Education, Bihar, Patna.
2. Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road,
Buddh Marg, Patna, Bihar-800017.
4. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road,
Buddh Marg, Patna, Bihar-800017.
5. The Examination Controller, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha
Library Road, Buddh Marg, Patna, Bihar-800017.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Abhas Chandra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Government Pleader (24)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the respondents.
2.The instant writ application has been filed for the
following relief:-
a) For issuance of a writ of Mandamus or
any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, or
direction/directions to the Respondent Board to
consider the submission of the Objection Form raised
by the Petitioner through Official Portal in Secondary
Teacher Eligibility Test (STET)- 2025 conducted by
Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB).
b) For a direction to Respondent Board to
consider the Objection and rectify the anomalies in the
evaluation process of the said test.
c) For a direction to Respondent Board to
provide Revised Answer Key of the Petitioner after
considering her Objection Form.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1754 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
d) For further pass any other order/orders
in shape of consequential relief to the Petitioner may
be found to legally entitled to in the facts and
circumstances of the instant case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
despite this petitioner having given authoritative answers to the
questions, still he has secured 63 marks and, whereas, the
objections with respect more than 30 questions with
authoritative answer have already been provided still, such
objections have not been adjudicated.
4. It is next submitted that even the principles of
normalization, which also forms part of the advertisement no.
PR 218/2025, appears not to have been invoked in the case of
the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the Bihar School Examination Board, submits that
since the appropriate representation with objections have
already been filed, the petitioner may be directed to file a
detailed representation in the light of the order passed by this
Court and, on filing of such representation within the time so
fixed, the same shall be adjudicated and necessary order shall be
passed and, if the petitioner is found eligible then further action
shall be taken. Learned counsel for the B.S.E.B. further submits
Patna High Court CWJC No.1754 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
that the experts have already been employed for adjudicating the
objections and once such objections are there, the same shall be
adjudicated.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties, this
Court is of the view that instead of keeping this matter pending,
the petitioner be directed to file representation with all such
details for adjudication within a period of one week, referring to
his earlier representation, which is said to have been filed and,
even the issues of normalization in terms of the advertisement
may also be raised, if the same has not been raised for
consideration by the authorities concerned.
7. On filing such representation, the representation so
filed by the petitioner, shall be adjudicated within a period of
two weeks from the date of filing of such representation by the
petitioner.
8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
writ application stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
shikha/-
U
Checking your session…