Patna High Court
Jay KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The writ petition was dismissed, with the Court directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate before any further relief can be considered.
Summary
Jay Kumari, former Pramukh of Ara Sadar Panchayat Samiti, filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking mandamus against several state officials to act on alleged misappropriation of labourers' wages and to provide a master roll prepared after her removal. She claimed that representations made to the District Magistrate, District Panchayat Raj Officer and Block Development Officer had been ignored. The Court examined whether the petitioner had exhausted the statutory remedy of approaching the appropriate administrative authority before invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court. Finding that the petitioner had not filed a fresh representation before the District Magistrate, the Court directed her to do so within four weeks. It further ordered that, if a representation is filed, the District Magistrate must decide the matter within three months. Consequently, the writ application was disposed of without granting the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is required to approach the District Magistrate as a prerequisite before seeking mandamus from the High Court
- Whether the High Court can entertain a writ petition for mandamus when administrative remedies remain unexhausted
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- Panchayati Raj
- misappropriation of wages
- master roll
- administrative remedy
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5333 of 2026
======================================================
Jay Kumari Wife of Ramai Ram, Resident of Village-Saidpur, P.S.-Ara
Muffasil, Post-Barka Dumra, District-Bhojpur (Ara). At present Member of
Ara Sadar Panchayat Samiti, Ara Sadar, Ara, Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur.
4. The Deputy Development Commissioner cum Chief Executive Officer (Zila
Parishad), Bhojpur.
5. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Bhojpur.
6. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Ara Sadar, Bhojpur.
7. The Block Development Officer cum Executive Officer, Ara Sadar
Panchayat Samiti, Ara Sadar, Bhojpur.
8. The Block Panchayat Raj Officer cum Executive Officer, Ara Sadar
Panchayat Samiti, Ara Sadar, Bhojpur.
9. The Accountant, Ara Sadar Panchayat Samiti, Ara Sadar, Bhojpur.
10. Minta Devi, W/o not known to the petitioner, At present Pramukh of Ara
Sadar Panchayat Samiti, Block-Ara Sadar, Bhojpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyam Kishore, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Standing Counsel (7)
For the Zila Parishad : Mr. Nikesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for
the following relief(s):
“I. For issuance of an appropriate writ in
the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and directing
Patna High Court CWJC No.5333 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
the Respondent Authorities to take action against the
concerned Respondents on misappropriation of the
payment of the labours, who worked in the Petitioner's
tenure while she was Pramukh of the Panchayat Samiti
Ara Sadar, Block Ara Sadar, Bhojpur.
II. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the
nature of MANDAMUS commanding and directing the
Respondent Authorities to provide the master roll to the
Petitioner, which has been prepared after removal of
the Petitioner from the post of Pramukh, Panchayat
Samiti Ara Sadar, Bhojpur.
III. For issuance of any other appropriate
writ / writs, order/orders, direction/directions for which
the writ petitioner would be found entitled under the
facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. After some argument, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner having filed several
representations before the respondent nos.3, 5 and 7, he has
neither received any response thereto nor he has been granted
any reliefs prayed for in the instant writ application. As such, he
has moved this Court for the reliefs as stated herein above.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the
writ application is disposed of directing the petitioner to file a
fresh representation before the District Magistrate, Bhojpur
(respondent no.3) for his remaining grievances within a period
of four weeks.
5. In case such a representation is filed, the District
Patna High Court CWJC No.5333 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
Magistrate, Bhojpur (respondent no.3) shall decide the same in
accordance with law within a period of three months from the
date of its filing.
6. The writ application stands disposed of.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Saurabh/-
U
Checking your session…