Patna High Court
Arti KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court declined to issue a writ of mandamus and disposed of the petition, directing the petitioner to file a detailed representation and the Board to adjudicate the objections within stipulated time.
Summary
Arti Kumari, a candidate in the 2025 Teacher Eligibility Test (STET) conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB), obtained 59 marks despite providing authoritative answers and filed an objection form through the official portal. She sought a writ of mandamus directing the Board to consider her objections, rectify evaluation anomalies, and issue a revised answer key. The Board argued that a proper detailed representation was required and that experts were already engaged to adjudicate objections. The High Court held that the petition could not be entertained by mandamus and instead ordered the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation within one week, referencing her earlier submission, and directed the Board to decide the matter within two weeks. Consequently, the writ application was disposed of without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the Bihar School Examination Board is legally bound to consider the petitioner’s objection form and apply the normalization procedure under advertisement PR 218/2025.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the Board to revise the answer key and rectify the evaluation process.
- Whether the petitioner must first file a detailed representation before the Court can entertain the writ relief.
Subjects
- Teacher Eligibility Test
- STET
- objection form
- mandamus
- normalization
- Bihar School Examination Board
- writ jurisdiction
- evaluation anomalies
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.625 of 2026
======================================================
Arti Kumari Daughter of Surendra Kumar Sinha, resident of Village-
Imaliyachak, Post- Saidabad, P.S.- Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Education, Bihar, Patna.
2. Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Buddh Marg, Lodipur,
Patna, Bihar- 800001.
4. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Buddh Marg, Lodipur,
Patna, Bihar- 800001.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.N. Jha, AC to GP11
For the BSEB : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Anand, Adv.
Ms. Kanu Priya, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 The instant writ application has been filed for the
following relief:-
“1. That this present writ application has
been filed before this Hon’ble Court invoking its writ
jurisdiction for following reliefs:-
a) For issuance of a writ of Mandamus or
any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, or
direction/directions to the Respondent Board to
consider the submission of the Objection Form raised
by the Petitioner through Official Portal in Secondary
Patna High Court CWJC No.625 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/4
Teacher Eligibility Test (STET)- 2025 conducted by
Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB).
b) For a direction to Respondent Board to
consider the Objection and rectify the anomalies in the
evaluation process of the said test.
c) For a direction to Respondent Board to
provide Revised Answer Key of the Petitioner after
considering her Objection Form.
d) For further pass any other order/orders
in shape of consequential relief to the Petitioner may
be found to legally entitled to in the facts and
circumstances of the instant case.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
despite this petitioner having given authoritative answers to the
questions, still she has secured 59 marks and, whereas, the
objections with respect to nine questions with authoritative
answer have already been provided still, such objections have
not been adjudicated.
3. It is next submitted that even the principles of
normalization, which also forms part of the advertisement no.
PR 218/2025, appears not to have been invoked in the case of
the petitioner.
4. On the other hand, learned senior counsel appearing
on behalf of the Bihar School Examination Board, submits that
since the appropriate representation with objections have
Patna High Court CWJC No.625 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/4
already been filed, the petitioner may be directed to file a
detailed representation in the light of the order passed by this
Court and, on filing of such representation within the time so
fixed, the same shall be adjudicated and necessary order shall be
passed and, if the petitioner is found eligible then further action
shall be taken. Learned counsel for the B.S.E.B. further submits
that the experts have already been employed for adjudicating the
objections and once such objections are there, the same shall be
adjudicated.
5. Considering the submissions of the parties, this
Court is of the view that instead of keeping this matter pending,
the petitioner be directed to file representation with all such
details for adjudication within a period of one week, referring to
her earlier representation, which is said to have been filed and,
even the issues of normalization in terms of the advertisement
may also be raised, if the same has not been raised for
consideration by the authorities concerned.
6. On filing such representation, the representation so
filed by the petitioner, shall be adjudicated within a period of
two weeks from the date of filing of such representation by the
petitioner.
7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
Patna High Court CWJC No.625 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
4/4
writ application stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
rishi/-
U
Checking your session…