Patna High Court
Akhilesh Kumar Thakur and AnrversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The High Court dismissed the writ, holding that the matter had already been decided in CWJC No.11550 of 2016 and that the court cannot compel the State to regularise the petitioners’ services.
Summary
The petitioners, two Accredited Statistical Volunteers, filed a writ seeking a direction to the State of Bihar to produce the order cancelling the ASV panel, to quash that cancellation, and to regularise their services as promised by the government. The respondents contended that the matter had already been decided in CWJC No.11550 of 2016 (Shambhu Kumar v. State of Bihar) where the court held that the Cabinet’s successive resolutions were a matter of policy and not amenable to judicial interference, and only a conditional rider was given for future engagement. The court noted that the petitioners had also filed a separate LPA (No.535 of 2017) which was dismissed. Relying on the earlier judgment, the court found no fresh ground to entertain the writ and held that the petitioners could not obtain a direction for regularisation. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of in accordance with the earlier decision. The court emphasized the limits of judicial review over administrative policy decisions.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can direct the State to produce the order cancelling the Accredited Statistical Volunteers panel and to regularise the petitioners’ services.
- Whether the earlier judgment in CWJC No.11550 of 2016 bars fresh relief in the present writ.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to be treated as regular contract employees of the State.
Subjects
- Writ jurisdiction
- Judicial review
- Administrative policy
- Accredited Statistical Volunteers
- Regularisation of contract employees
- Cabinet resolution
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1930 of 2017
======================================================
1. Akhilesh Kumar Thakur Son of Sri Nilamber Thakur, resident of village -
Sara, Post office - Garhbanaili, P.S. Kasba, District - Purnea
2. Om Prakash Singh, Son of Sri Sampat Kumar Singh, Resident of village -
Dhamar, P.S. Mufassil, District - Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Planning and Development,
Government of Bihar, Patna
3. The Senior Joint Director - Cum - Office Head, Planning and Development
Department and Economics and Statistical Directorate, Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Purnea
5. The District Statistical Officer, Purnea
6. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Arra
7. The District Statistical Officer, Bhojpur at Arra
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Fardeen Abbas, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sumant Kumar Singh, AC to GA- 2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 20-01-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioners have filed the instant application
for the following relief:
“1. That this is an
application for direction to the
Respondents to produce the order by
which panel of Accredited Statistical
Patna High Court CWJC No.1930 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
2/5
Voluntaries (herein after referred to as
A.S.V.) has been cancelled and
decision to this effect has been
published in daily news paper of the
State of Bihar in June’2016 and quash
the same and direct the respondents to
regularize the services of A.S.V. as has
been promised by the Government
which has been published and the said
promise has been published in the
daily news-paper of the State of Bihar
as well as through various
communication of the Principal
Secretary of Planning & Development
Department and petitioners should be
given similar treatment as that of
other contract or engaged employees
of the respondents.
And/or pass such other
order/orders which may appear fit and
proper.”
3. At the outset, it is submitted by learned counsel
for the respondents that the issue raised in the instant writ
application came up for consideration in C.W.J.C. no. 11550 of
2016 (Shambhu Kumar and Ors. vs. The State of Bihar and
Ors.). A batch of writ applications came to be decided by
judgment dated 24.1.2017 by the learned Single Judge in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1930 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
3/5
following terms:
“In my opinion, the two
resolutions have been passed by the
Cabinet at different stages. May be at
the stage when the first resolution was
passed on 19.2.2015, the Cabinet was
of a different opinion but the
developments that has taken place in
between the first resolution passed on
19.2.2015 and the second resolution
passed on 7.6.2016, becomes a
relevant factor for a judicial review of
the action taken. The explanation
present in the second supplementary
counter affidavit as regarding the
work discharged by these petitioners
coupled with the stand on the
availability of work and availability of
funds, would not persuade this Court
to issue any direction to the State to
continue with the panel. Even if there
have been stray instances of work
being taken from these ‘ASVs’, the
choice lies with the State for such
engagement. If the State has decided
to now get the work done
departmentally and there is nothing
on record which would show that the
State has deviated from such stand,
Patna High Court CWJC No.1930 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
4/5
there is no reason for the petitioners
to raise any grievance nor any
occasion arises to interfere with the
decision. In fact in the words of the
Supreme Court as found in the
judgment of the Indian Drugs and
Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (supra) and
Nihal Singh (supra), any direction by
this Court in the circumstances
discussed, either for continuation of
the panel or for considering the cases
of these petitioners for regularisation,
in absence of facts supporting
continuity of discharge, would amount
to a direction for creation of post as
well as financial liability which is
neither in the domain nor within the
framework of judicial review.
The issues so taken note
of are answered accordingly.
For the reasons so
discussed, I am not persuaded to
either interfere with the Cabinet
resolution or with the order of the
Planning department issued
thereunder, a copy of which has been
placed on record vide Annexure ‘C’ to
the counter affidavit filed in CWJC
No.11550 of 2016 but with a rider that
in case the State would be in need of
Patna High Court CWJC No.1930 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
5/5
the services of the Accredited
Statistical Volunteers then the claim of
these petitioners may be considered
for such engagement considering the
experience gained and the training
undergone by these petitioners over
the period of time and even if the State
would decide to look for fresh
aspirants, due weightage be given to
the case of these petitioners including
age relaxation.
The writ petitions are
accordingly disposed of.”
4. It is further submitted that the writ petitioners
preferred L.P.A. no. 535 of 2017 which was dismissed by
judgment dated 17.4.2018.
5. In view of the above, the writ application stands
disposed off in terms of the judgment dated 24.1.2017 passed in
C.W.J.C. no. 11550 of 2016.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 20.1.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.