Patna High Court
Khushbu KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court held that the petition cannot be entertained by mandamus and directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate, who must verify the mark‑sheet and decide within 90 days.
Summary
The petitioner, Khushbu Kumari, applied for the post of Anganwadi Sevika under Advertisement No. 01/2022 and was placed at the top of the provisional merit list. The final selection list was not published, and she filed a representation seeking a selection letter, alleging that the delay was due to alleged interpolation in her mark‑sheet. The State contended that the mark‑sheet showed tampering, justifying the hold on her selection. The Court considered whether a mandamus could be issued to compel the authority to issue the selection letter and whether the District Magistrate could be directed to verify the mark‑sheet. It declined to grant mandamus, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate, who must verify the mark‑sheet with the concerned board and decide within 90 days. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a mandamus directing the authority to issue a selection letter despite alleged interpolation in her mark‑sheet.
- Whether the District Magistrate can be directed to verify the mark‑sheet and decide on the petitioner's representation within a stipulated period.
Subjects
- mandamus
- selection process
- Anganwadi Sevika
- verification of mark‑sheet
- public service recruitment
- administrative law
- high court writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3157 of 2026
======================================================
Khushbu Kumari wife of Manish Kumar, Resident of Village-Bhediya Kala,
P.S.-Buniyadganj, Dist-Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, social welwafre Department,
Patna-1.
2. The Managing Director ICDS Bihar, Patna.1.
3. The Commissioner Magadh Division, Gaya.
4. The Distric Magistrate, Gaya.
5. The District Programme Officer, Gaya.
6. The Child Development programme officer Maanpur, Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Sushmita Sharma, AC to SC-9
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 09-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief/s:-
(i) A mandamus commanding
direction to concerned authority to provide
selection letter to selected applicant
Khushbu Kumari who is in the top of
provisional merit list.
(ii) For issuance of any other writ,
writs, order, orders to which the petitioner
may found entitled too.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3157 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
2/3
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has applied for selection to the post of Anganbadi
Sevika in the prescribed format for her selection in Ward No. 7,
Anganbadi Center No. 108, which comes within the purview of
CDPO, Manpur, Gaya. He further submits that the said
application was made in light of Advertisement No. 01/2022,
but the final list has not been published and the result has been
kept in abeyance. He further submits that, in this regard, she has
filed a representation before the concerned CDPO, but the final
result has not been published. He further submits that the
petitioner has filed a representation in which she has
categorically demanded that the selection be made in her favour,
whereas the concerned officials have taken a decision that, until
and unless the proper verification shall not be made, process of
selection shall not be completed. He further submits that in the
petitioner’s representation, it has been requested that
verification may be made from the concerned officials/Board.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that the letter of the CDPO indicates that there appears
to be interpolation in the mark-sheet and it is due to this reason,
the selection has not been completed.
5. Upon hearing the parties, it transpires to this Court
Patna High Court CWJC No.3157 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
3/3
that the petitioner has not only requested the concerned CDPO
but also the District Magistrate, Gaya, and in her representation
a categorical request has been made that if, there is any
overwriting in the mark-sheet, then verification may be made
from the concerned officials/Board.
6. In light of the submissions made, it is hereby
directed to the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with
a copy of this order within 30 days from today before the
District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent No. 4). Upon receipt of
the same, the respondent No. 4 is directed to take a decision on
the petitioner’s representation within 90 days thereafter. It is
made clear that the District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent No. 4)
shall verify about the mark-sheet from the concerned
Board/Institution and then take a decision in accordance with
law within the above stipulated period.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U
Checking your session…