Patna High Court
Marzina KhatoonversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court held that the memos dated 20‑02‑2023 and 22‑02‑2023 are illegal and set them aside, directing payment of the petitioner’s pensionary benefits.
Summary
The petitioner, a widow, challenged two government memos (No. 594 dated 20‑02‑2023 and No. SC/49/23 dated 22‑02‑2023) that rejected the absorption and pension benefits of her deceased husband, a teacher, and other similarly situated employees. She argued that the orders were illegal, violated natural‑justice principles, and were contrary to a prior judgment of the Patna High Court’s coordinate bench in CWJC No. 9131/2022 which had held the rejection unlawful. The court noted that the earlier judgment had attained finality and that the memos were issued without any hearing or show‑cause notice. Relying on that precedent, the court quashed both memos and directed the authorities to adjudicate the widow’s claim and, if justified, grant her pension, pensionary dues and family pension within eight weeks. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed with relief granted to the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether the memos rejecting absorption and pension of the petitioner’s deceased husband are ultra vires and illegal.
- Whether the principles of natural justice were violated in passing the memos.
- Whether the coordinate bench judgment in CWJC No. 9131/2022 is final and binding, requiring the quash of subsequent orders.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pension, pensionary dues and family pension as a widow of a teacher.
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- pension
- family pension
- natural justice
- regularisation
- absorption
- service law
- posthumous benefits
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2882 of 2026
======================================================
Marzina Khatoon W/o Late Abdul Rauf Ansari, Resident of Village-Rahika,
Near Masjid, District-Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Education
Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
4. The Vice-Chancellor, L.N. Mithila University, Darbhanga.
5. The Registrar, L.N. Mithila University, Darbhanga.
6. The Finance Officer, L.N. Mithila University, Darbhanga.
7. The Principal, B.M. College, Rahika, District-Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shashi Bhushan Singh, Adv.
Mr. Ritesh Ranjan, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Surekha Kumari, AC to GP18
For the LNMU : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Sinha, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the
following relief:-
“1(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ in
the nature of Certiorari for quashing the Memo no.
594 dated 20.02.2023 issued under the signature of
respondent no.3 with respect to the husband of the
petitioner by which the appointment of the husband
of the petitioner and some others has been held
illegal and also quashing the Memo no. SC/49/23
Patna High Court CWJC No.2882 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
2/5
dated 22.02.2023 issued by the respondent no. 5 by
which payment of any benefit has been stopped in
view of letter of the State Govt., as the aforesaid
order is in teeth of law laid down by the Hon'ble
High Court in Judgment dated 12.01.2024 passed in
CWJC No. 9131/2022 and its analogous cases,
moreover the husband of the petitioner has been
absorbed in service keeping in view of the direction
of the Hon'ble High Court as well as the Hon'ble
Chancellor, Bihar after following the procedure.
(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the
nature of Mandamus, Commanding and directing the
respondent authorities to make payment the pension ,
pensionary dues and family pension of the petitioner
with pendentilite interest which is stopped from Feb.
2023, since due to harassing attitude of the
respondents the petitioner is being victimised.”
3. Counsel for the petitioner by referring to Annexure
P/8 and P/13 of the writ petition submits that the appointment of
the husband of the petitioner on the post of Teacher was made
against the sanctioned post and ignoring the same, the Director,
Higher Education, Government of Bihar had passed a reasoned
order by which ignoring the ratio laid down in the case of
Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Uma Devi (3) & Ors.
reported in (2006)4 SCC 1, the case of the petitioner’s husband
as also other 17 teachers was found to be irregular and not fit for
Patna High Court CWJC No.2882 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
3/5
regularization/absorption and, accordingly, the order as
contained in Memo No. 594 dated 20.02.2023 came to be
issued.
4. Counsel for the petitioner next submitted that the
order, rejecting absorption/regularization of the petitioner’s
husband and other similarly situated persons, became the
subject matter of challenge in CWJC No. 9131 of 2022 and its
analogous cases and the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had
interfered with the impugned order dated 20.02.2023, holding
the same to be illegal on the ground that the said order of
rejection is passed after five years of retirement, while there was
obvious severance of employee and employer relationship and
in no stretch of imagination can be said to be justified under any
law all the more when the same has been passed without there
being any proceeding or in compliance of the principles of
natural justice.
5. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s
husband got died on 14.06.2015 and this order, whereby the
claim of absorption/regularization is said to have been rejected
after almost eight years in the year 2023 and, obviously, the
petitioner was not heard, while the order impugned is said to
have been passed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2882 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
4/5
6. Since, the Co-ordinate Bench has already held that
the appointment of the petitioner’s husband was made as against
the sanctioned post and once a right has been created or rested
in favour of the petitioner’s husband and as also similarly
situated persons, the same could not have been divested
unilaterally much less in a very casual manner without giving
any show-cause notice and/or proper opportunity of hearing.
7. This order of the Co-ordinate Bench passed in
CWJC No. 9131 of 2022 was not put to challenge because the
Committee which was headed by the Chief Secretary decided
not to take this order in appeal and, accordingly, the order
passed by the Co-ordinate Bench is said to have attained finality.
8. In view of the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench
having attained finality, this Court has no hesitation in quashing
the order as contained in Annexure- P/13, which has been
passed keeping in row the Memo No. 594 dated 20.02.2023, and
accordingly, the order as contained in Annexure-13 & 13/1
bearing Memo No. SC/49/23 dated 22.02.2023 and memo No.
594 dated 20.02.2023 respectively, are set aside.
9. In view of the impugned orders having been quashed/
set aside, the authorities are directed to adjudicate the claim of
the widow petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2882 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
5/5
date of filing of a representation by her and, on finding the
claims to be justified in law and at par with other similarly
situated persons, the same benefits shall also be extended to the
petitioner widow within the same period.
10. With the aforementioned observation and
direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
rishi/-
U
Checking your session…