Patna High Court
Gyan GouravversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court set aside the cancellation orders as they violated natural justice, thereby granting the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Gyan Gourav, was appointed as Executive Assistant on a contract basis after clearing the written exam and CET. His appointment was later cancelled by a letter dated 9‑Nov‑2016 issued by the District Magistrate and a subsequent memo dated 10‑Nov‑2016 by the District Sub‑Registrar, purportedly under the Bihar Right to Public Grievance Redressal Act, without any prior notice or hearing. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking quashing of both orders and reinstatement with back wages. The Court held that the cancellation orders were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice as no notice or opportunity to be heard was afforded. Consequently, both the letter and the memo were set aside and the writ petition was allowed, though the respondents were left free to pursue any further action against the petitioner in accordance with law.
Issues considered
- Whether the cancellation of the petitioner’s contract appointment without prior notice and hearing violates the principles of natural justice.
- Whether the orders issued under the Bihar Right to Public Grievance Redressal Act can be quashed on the ground of procedural irregularity.
Subjects
- natural justice
- procedural fairness
- contract appointment
- public grievance redressal
- certiorari
- administrative law
- appointment cancellation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6172 of 2017
======================================================
Gyan Gourav, Son of Late Bedanand Das, resident of Shastri Nagar, P.O.-
Madhubani, P.S.- K.Hat, District- Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, the Principal Secretary, General Administration
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Purnea.
3. The District Sub Registrar, Purnea.
4. The Deputy Collector (Establishment), Purnea.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Asha Verma, Advocate
Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Amit Kumar Anand, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, AC to GP-4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 13-02-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for
the following reliefs :-
“(i) For issuance of a writ in the
nature of Certiorari for quashing of the order
contained in Memo no. 885 dated 10-11-2016
(Anx.-6) issued under the signature of the District
Sub Registrar, Purnea the respondent no. 3 by
which in the light of the order contained in letter
no. 1863/Astha. dated 9-11-2016 (Anx.-5) passed
by the respondent no. 2, the engagement of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.6172 of 2017 dt.13-02-2026
2/6
petitioner as Executive Assistant has been
cancelled.
(ii) For issuance of an appropriate
writ for quashing of the order contained in letter
no. 1863 Astha. dated 9-11-2016 (Anx.- 5) passed
by the respondent no. 2 by which, in the light of
the order passed on the complaint received under
Public Complaint redressal Right Act, the
respondent no. 2 has directed immediately to
cancel the engagement of the petitioner and to
report.
(iii) For issuance of an appropriate
writ directing and commanding the respondents
to give the petitioner all consequential benefits
including the reinstatement of the petitioner in
his service immediately with arrear and current
wages after quashing the aforesaid order
contained in Memo no. 885 dated 10-11-2018
(Anx.-6) and the order contained in letter no.
1863 Astha. dated 9-11-2016 (Anx.- 5).
(iv) For any other relief/reliefs of
which the petitioner is legally entitled to.”
3. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the
respondents coming out with an advertisement/notice on
10.6.2013 for engagement of Executive Assistants on contract
basis, the petitioner applied and having appeared in the written
examination and the Computer Eligibility Test (CET), he
succeeded. In the panel of candidates prepared on 18.10.2013
(Annexure-3), the name of the petitioner figured at Serial
Patna High Court CWJC No.6172 of 2017 dt.13-02-2026
3/6
no.289.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
that in the total list of 315 candidates, there were star marked
against the marks granted to a number of candidates which
denoted that they have only been provisionally selected and
their final selection would be subject to their passing the CET
which was expected to be re-conducted within a short period. If
those candidates who had not cleared the CET is taken out, the
merit position of the petitioner would improve from serial
no.289 to serial no.202.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the petitioner started working as Executive Assistant to the
satisfaction of all concerned, however he was surprised to
receive an order contained in letter dated 9.11.2016 of the
District Magistrate, Purnea which was to the effect that pursuant
to an order passed under the Bihar Right to Public Grievance
Redressal Act, his selection is being cancelled. The
consequential order dated 10.11.2016 was communicated under
the signature of the District Sub Registrar, Purnea.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
notice whatsoever has been given to the petitioner prior to the
order cancelling the petitioner’s selection on contract basis. The
Patna High Court CWJC No.6172 of 2017 dt.13-02-2026
4/6
orders impugned are fit to be set aside on this ground alone.
7. The application is opposed by learned counsel for
the respondents. It is submitted that the order contained in letter
dated 9.11.2016 cancelling the petitioner’s selection was
pursuant to the order passed under the Right to Public Grievance
Redressal Act. A copy of the said order dated 10.9.2016 of the
District Public Grievance Redressal Officer, Purnea has been
produced, a copy of which has been provided by learned
counsel for the respondents to learned counsel for the petitioner.
It is thus submitted that in view of the contents of the said order
dated 10.9.2016, the petitioner has no case and as such the writ
application be dismissed.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the material on record.
9. The facts leading to cancellation of the petitioner’s
engagement as Executive Assistant by order dated 9.11.2016
already having been stated in detail herein above, the same are
not being repeated.
10. In normal circumstances, the Court would have
directed the respondents to bring the order dated 10.9.2016 on
record on an affidavit and thereafter proceeded to hear the case
after taking the response of learned counsel for the petitioner.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6172 of 2017 dt.13-02-2026
5/6
However in view of the order that the Court proposes to pass,
the respondents are not being directed to place the said order of
the District Public Grievance Redressal Authority on record.
11. Though it transpires from the contents of the order
dated 10.9.2016 that there has been some irregularities in
carrying out appointments from the panel of candidates prepared
after conduct of the examination etc. insofar as while the
candidate at Serial no.257 was not appointed, the petitioner who
figured at Serial no.289 was appointed. Similar other instances
of the roster point and reservation policy etc. not having been
followed has been stated therein.
12. Accepting all the facts which may have been
stated in the order dated 10.9.2016, there remains no denial of
the fact that before passing of the order dated 9.11.2016
(Annexure-5) and the order dated 10.11.2016 (Annexure-6),
both impugned herein, neither any notice was given to the
petitioner nor any opportunity given to meet the allegations
levelled therein. It is a clear case of violation of the principles of
natural justice and the writ application is fit to be allowed in this
ground alone.
13. In view of the facts and circumstances stated
herein above, the order impugned dated 9.11.2016 (Annexure-5)
Patna High Court CWJC No.6172 of 2017 dt.13-02-2026
6/6
issued under the signature of the District Magistrate, Purnea and
the order dated 10.11.2016 (Annexure-6) issued under the
signature of the District Sub-Registrar, Purnea are both set aside
and the writ application is allowed.
14. However in view of the facts and circumstances of
the case, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed against the
petitioner in accordance with law.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 16.02.2026
Transmission Date N/A
Checking your session…