Patna High Court
Kumar ManishversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that Prapatra ‘K’ was validly issued under the Bihar Framing of Articles of Charge against Government Servants Regulations, 2017 and therefore dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
Kumar Manish, a government employee, filed a writ petition seeking the quashing of Prapatra ‘K’ and a departmental proceeding initiated under Memo No. 294 dated 12‑05‑2021, and also prayed for payment of all consequential salary benefits with interest. The State argued that even if Prapatra ‘K’ were defective it would benefit the petitioner and that the petition was filed merely to avoid the departmental proceeding. The Court examined whether Prapatra ‘K’ was issued in compliance with the applicable regulations. It found that the document had been issued in accordance with the Bihar Framing of Articles of Charge against Government Servants Regulations, 2017, and was therefore not defective. Consequently, the Court declined to interfere and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether Prapatra ‘K’ is defective and liable to be quashed
- Whether the departmental proceeding under Memo No. 294 can be set aside
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to consequential salary benefits including arrears and interest
Subjects
- writ petition
- quashing
- departmental proceeding
- government servant regulations
- salary arrears
- Prapatra K
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5498 of 2026
======================================================
Kumar Manish Son of Late Sita Ram Sharma, Resident of Dighi Kalan, Dighi
Kalan, Dighi Kala, Post- Manibhakurah, P.S.- Sarai, Vaishali, District-
Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar at Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Land Revenue Department, Government of
Bihar.
3. The Secretary, Land Revenue Department, Government of Bihar at Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pranav Raj, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Additional Advocate General (5)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
learned counsel appearing for the respondent State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
present writ petition has been filed for quashing Prapatra ‘K’
(as contained in Annexure P/3) as well as for quashing the
departmental proceeding initiated pursuant to Memo No. 294
dated 12.05.2021 (as contained in Annexure P/2). The petitioner
has further prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to
grant all consequential benefits, including arrears of salary, after
taking into account all promotions, increments, and pay
revisions applicable to the petitioner, along with interest
thereon.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5498 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/2
3. Learned counsel for the State submits that if
Prapatra ‘K’ is defective, the same would give benefit to the
petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has
challenged Prapatra ‘K’ only with a view to avoid the
departmental proceeding.
4. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to interfere with Prapatra ‘K’, as the same has been
issued in accordance with the provisions of the Bihar Framing
of Articles of Charge against Government Servants Regulations,
2017.
5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
U
Checking your session…