Patna High Court

Amit KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 17 March 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

The court held that, in the absence of any defence or evidence from the petitioner, the ex parte order could not be set aside and the petition was dismissed.

Summary

Petitioner Amit Kumar filed a writ petition seeking to quash an ex parte order dated 06.01.2026 issued by the District Magistrate-cum-District Programme Co‑ordinator under the MNREGA scheme, alleging violation of natural justice for not being given a hearing. The State argued that the original authority, the Deputy Development Commissioner, acted on information that the petitioner had entered the system using a forged B.Tech. degree and that the petitioner failed to submit any explanation despite being directed to do so. The petition did not contain any pleading or evidence to prove the genuineness of the petitioner’s degree. The Court observed that the petitioner had not taken any defence and therefore found no ground to interfere with the order. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the ex parte order passed without hearing violates the principles of natural justice
Whether the court can quash the order and reinstate the petitioner under the MNREGA scheme

Subjects

natural justice
ex parte order
MNREGA
quashing order
procedural fairness
forged degree
writ petition

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3678 of 2026
                 ======================================================
                 Amit Kumar Son of Santosh Kumar Jha, Resident of Rasulpur Saiyad Salim,
                 Police Station-Ahiyapur, District-Muzaffarpur, Bihar.

                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Development
                 Department, Patna.
           2.    The Secretary, Rural Development Deptt., Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
           3.    The Commissioner, Manrega, Rural Development Deptt., Bihar, Patna.
           4.    The District Magistrate cum Upper District Programm Co-Ordinator,
                 Manrega, Madhubani.
           5.    The District Magistrate cum District Programme Co-Ordinator, Manrega,
                 Darbhanga.
           6.    The D.D.C. cum Dy District Program Co-Ordinator Manrega, Madhubani.
           7.    The D.D.C. cum Dy District Program Co-Ordinator Manrega, Darbhanga.
           8.    The District Program Officer, Manrega, Madhubani.
           9.    The District Program Officer, Manrega, Darbhanga.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :     Mr.Arvind Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :     Mr. Navnit Kumar, AC to GP-18
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   counsel for the State.

                               2. The present writ petition has been filed for

                   quashing/setting aside Memo No. 34/D.R. dated 06.01.2026

                   issued by respondent No. 4, the District Magistrate-cum-District

                   Programme Co-ordinator, MNREGA, Darbhanga, whereby and

                   whereunder an ex parte order has been passed without following

                   due procedure and without affording any opportunity of hearing
Patna High Court CWJC No.3678 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                            2/3




          to the petitioner, and for reinstatement of the petitioner.

                      3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, at

          the time of passing the impugned order, there has been a gross

          violation of the principles of natural justice. It is, therefore,

          submitted that immediate interference by this Court is

          warranted.

                      4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,

          submits that the original authority under the MNREGA Scheme

          is the Deputy Development Commissioner (DDC), who has

          taken action upon receiving information that the petitioner had

          entered into the system by virtue of a forged and fabricated

          B.Tech. (Civil) degree. It is further submitted that the impugned

          order categorically mentions that the original authority had

          sought an explanation from the petitioner, but no explanation

          was submitted. The appellate authority had also directed the

          petitioner to file an explanation / show cause; however, no show

          cause was filed. For this reason, both the original authority and

          the appellate authority decided to terminate the petitioner.

                      5. In the writ petition, there is no pleading to the

          effect that the petitioner’s certificate is genuine, nor has any

          document been produced in support thereof. As such, it

          transpires to this Court that the defence which the petitioner
            Patna High Court CWJC No.3678 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      ought to have taken has not been taken.

                                  6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court

                      is not inclined to interfere in the present writ petition.

                      Accordingly, it is dismissed.



                                                 (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…