Patna High Court
Rohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The impugned cancellation order is unsustainable and is set aside, with a direction to grant a proper hearing before any further action.
Summary
Rohit Kumar, a government teacher, challenged the cancellation of his posting to a GPS school made by the Education Department. He argued that the cancellation, effected through Letter No.72 dated 18‑01‑2021, was done without giving him a hearing and violated the Right to Education Act, 2009 and its rules. The State admitted that the petitioner was not heard before the cancellation and suggested remand for fresh consideration. The High Court held that the cancellation order breached natural justice and the statutory provisions, and therefore set it aside. The Court directed the Director of Primary Education to afford a proper hearing to the petitioner and the other respondent and to pass appropriate orders within eight weeks, after which the writ petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- The cancellation of the teacher's posting without a prior hearing violates principles of natural justice.
- Whether the impugned order of cancellation is violative of the Right to Education Act, 2009 and its Rules.
- Whether the court can set aside the cancellation order and direct a fresh hearing.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Right to Education Act
- natural justice
- teacher posting
- adjustment cancellation
- writ petition
- administrative law
- principles of rationalisation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6524 of 2021
======================================================
Rohit Kumar Son of Ramjeet Mall Resident of Ward No. 37, New Colony
Dak Banglow Road, Police Station- Bettiah Sadar, District- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department,
New Secretariat, Patna.
2. Director (Primary) Education, Education Department, New Secretariat,
Patna.
3. District Education Officer, West Champaran, Bettiah.
4. District Programme Officer (Establishment) Education Department, District-
West Champaran.
5. Akhtan Begum Wife of Allaudin Miyan at Presently working as Panchayat
Teacher in Govt. Primary School, Bahuarwa Padari, Bagaha-1, District-
West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pratap Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey (AAG-15)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
9 13-01-2026 Re : Interlocutory Application No.01 of 2021
The proposed relief sought in the Interlocutory
Application is being taken along with the main relief for its
adjudication and this Court proceeds to adjudicate the writ
petition on merits with the disposal of the Interlocutory
Application, by which the cancellation of his adjustment which
is said to have been made by the authorities, has now become
the subject matter of challenge, this Court now proceeds to
adjudicate the claim of this petitioner on merits by including the
additional relief proposed in the Interlocutory Application along
Patna High Court CWJC No.6524 of 2021(9) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
with the main relief and accordingly, the relief sought in the writ
petition is being adjudicated in the following manner.
Re : C.W.J.C. No.6524 of 2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The writ petition has been filed for the following
reliefs :-
“For issuance for an appropriate writ/writs,
order/orders, direction/directions, for quashing the
Letter No.72 dated 18.01.2021 whereby and
whereunder the Respondent No.2 has recalled his
own decision dated 10.11.2020 contained in Letter
No.960 which is contrary to statutory provisions as
well as Government decisions and for other
necessary relief/reliefs on the basis of facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
adjustment, which is said to have been made in the GPS School,
Bahuarwa, Padaree, vide Letter No.06 dated 10.11.2016, has
been cancelled without giving proper hearing and the
modification in the ratio sought for applying the principles of
rationalization, is also not in conformity with the Rule 25 of the
R.T.E. Act, 2009 and R.T.E Rules 2011.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
respondent No.5 submits that the posting of this petitioner was
Patna High Court CWJC No.6524 of 2021(9) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
done in the light of the report dated 30.09.2020, which is
contained in Letter No.830 annexed as Annexure-R5/B.
5. Learned counsel for the State does not dispute the
factual position, by referring to the impugned order, submits that
while issuing the cancellation order of adjustment made with
regard to this petitioner in the School in question, the petitioner
was admittedly not heard, and this matter may be remanded for
fresh adjudication / consideration.
6. Be that as it may, from the order impugned dated
18.01.2021, it is quite evident that the cancellation of his
adjustment made on the basis of 30:1 ratio, which subsequently
is said to have been modified but admittedly, this petitioner was
not given proper hearing and since, there is violation of
principles of natural justice, insofar as the adjustment, which is
said to have been cancelled and the petitioner on the basis of
such adjustment was continuing in the said school, where
respondent No.5 is said to have been allowed to continue,
therefore, the order impugned dated 18.01.2021 is unsustainable
and accordingly, is set aside.
7. The respondent No.2, Director, Primary Education,
Education Department, New Secretariat, Patna, would be
obliged to give a proper hearing to the petitioner as well as
Patna High Court CWJC No.6524 of 2021(9) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
respondent No.5 in terms of the applicable principles formulated
for posting on the basis of rationalization, which is adopted by
the Department as a matter of transfer and posting, to be framed
in consonance with the Right to Education Act, 2009 and R.T.E.
Rules 2011 and upon giving proper hearing to the petitioner as
well as respondent No.5, necessary orders shall be passed in
accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the
date of representation, which shall be made within four weeks
from today and the same shall be communicated to both the
parties, within the same time.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U
Checking your session…