Patna High Court
Arun Kumar ChoubeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court ordered the respondent to decide the petitioner’s pending representation within 90 days and disposed of the writ petition without granting substantive relief.
Summary
The petitioner, a police employee, filed a writ petition seeking reinstatement to his post after being dismissed by an order dated 18‑11‑2014, invoking earlier judgments of this Court that granted similar relief to other officers. He also asked for the quashing of the dismissal order on the ground that it was based on a prior memo already set aside by the Court, and for a time‑bound disposal of his representation filed on 13‑12‑2025. The State argued that the Court could at most direct a timely disposal of the representation. The Court, without examining the merits, directed the Commandant of the BSAP Battalion‑09 to decide on the representation within 90 days and disposed of the writ petition. Consequently, the petition was closed pending the administrative decision, and no substantive order on reinstatement or quashing was made.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, can be granted to a dismissed police officer under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution?
- Whether an administrative order founded on a previously quashed memo is itself void and subject to quashing?
- Whether the Court can direct a time‑bound disposal of a pending representation without adjudicating the substantive grievance?
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- certiorari
- reinstatement
- administrative law
- Articles 14, 16
- police service
- representation disposal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5285 of 2026
======================================================
Arun Kumar Choubey Son of- Harish Chandra Choubey, Resident of
Gaushala, Katihar, P.S.- Katihar, Dist.- Katihar, Pin Code-854105.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Patna,
Bihar.
2. The Director General of Police, Patna, Bihar.
3. The Commandant, Bihar Special Armed Police (BSAP) Battalion-09,
Jamalpur, Munger, Bihar,
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Akrity Aishwarya, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sita Ram Yadav, GP-16
Mr. Rakesh Kr. Shrivastava, AC to GP-16
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
learned counsel appearing for the State are present.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief/s :-
“(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order
or direction, preferably in the nature of
Mandamus, commanding the Respondents
particularly the Commandant, Bihar Special
Armed Police (BSAP) Battalion-09, Jamalpur,
Bihar, to reinstate the petitioner to the post
from which he was dismissed vide Memo No.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5285 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/4
1152/2014 dated 18.11.2014, with all
consequential benefits, in light of the
judgement rendered by this Hon’ble Court in
CWJC No. 4363 of 2020 Arun Kumar Choubey
Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.
(ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order
or direction, preferebly in the nature of
Mandamus, directing the respondents to extend
the same relief and benefits to the petitioner as
have been granted by this Hon’ble Court to
other similarly situated persons in Neeraj
Kumar v the State of Bihar in CWJC No.
15564 of 2012 and in Prince Kumar v State of
Bihar in CWJC NO. 1560 of 2012, and
consequently reinstate the petitioner on the
same post with all consequential benefits, in
the interest of justice and in compliance with
the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution of India, so as to prevent
arbitrariness and hostile discrimination.
(iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order
or direction, preferably in the nature of
Certiorari, for quashing the impugned order
bearing Memo No. 1152/2014 dated
18.11.2014, as being arbitrary, illegal, non est
in the eyes of law and violative of Articles 14
and 16 of the Constitution of India, in as much
as the same is founded upon Memo No. 118
dated 10.03.2021, which already stands
quashed and set aside by this Hon’ble Court,
Patna High Court CWJC No.5285 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/4
and thus the very substratum and foundation of
the impugned order has ceased to exist,
rendering the impugned action unsustainable
in law;
(iv) Issue an appropriate writ, order
or direction directing the respondent
authorities to consider and dispose of the
representation preferred by the petitioner in a
time -bound manner, in accordance with law,
and to grant the petitioner the relief of
reinstatement;
(v) Declare that once the foundation
of an administrative or quasi-judicial order is
set aside, any consequential action based
thereupon automatically falls, in terms of the
settled principle of law that “sublato
fundamento cadit opus.”
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has filed representation dated
13.12.2025, as contained in Annexure P/5 to the writ petition for
redressal of his grievance, but no decision has been taken on his
representation till date. Therefore, he moved before this Hon’ble
Court.
4. Learned counsel for the State submits that a
direction may be issued for disposal of the petitioner’s
representation within a specified period.
5. In the aforesaid background, this Court without
Patna High Court CWJC No.5285 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
4/4
entering into the merit or demerit of the case directs respondent
no.3, namely, the Commandant, Bihar Special Armed Police
(BSAP) Battalion-09, Jamalpur, Munger, Bihar to take a
decision on the representation dated 13.12.2025, as contained in
Annexure P/5 to the writ petition within a period of 90 days
from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
writ petition stands disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
U
Checking your session…