Patna High Court
Minu KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The Court directed the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's representation by a reasoned order within six weeks, and the writ application was disposed of on that basis.
Summary
Petitioner Minu Kumari, a sweeper employed at HPCL Muzaffarpur, alleged that she was terminated orally on 1 October 2025 without a written order or show‑cause notice. She filed a writ petition seeking reinstatement, a declaration that the termination was illegal, payment of salary arrears, EPF contributions with interest, and other statutory benefits. The Court noted the petitioner's request for a reasoned order on her representation (Annexure‑P/2) and, in the interest of justice, directed the respondents to dispose of that representation by a speaking order within six weeks of the order. No substantive determination on reinstatement or monetary reliefs was made. Consequently, the writ application was disposed of subject to the stipulated direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the oral termination of the petitioner without a written order or show‑cause notice is illegal and arbitrary.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement as a sweeper at HPCL Muzaffarpur.
- Whether the petitioner can claim arrears of salary, EPF contributions with interest, and other statutory benefits.
- Whether the respondents are required to pass a reasoned order on the petitioner's representation within a specified time.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- termination without notice
- writ of mandamus
- reinstatement
- EPF contributions
- industrial dispute
- procedural fairness
- administrative order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.667 of 2026
======================================================
Minu Kumari Wife of Shri Prem Kumar, Resident of Village and Post-
Pratapand, Police Station-Bhagwanpur, District-Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Labour Resources and Migrant
Workers Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.
3. The District Welfare Officer, Muzaffarpur.
4. The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL through its Managing
Director, Mumbai.
5. The General Manager, HPCL, Nehru Enclave, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar
Pradesh.
6. The Chief Vigilance Officer, Dak Bungalow Chauraha, Patna, Bihar.
7. The Chief Regional Manager, Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
8. The Deputy General Manager, HPCL, Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
9. The Additional Central PF Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund
Organisation, Road No. 6, R-Block, Serpantine Road, Patna.
10. The Regional P.F. Commissioner, BSNL Campus, Companybagh,
Muzaffarpur.
11. The Assistant P.F. Commissioner, BSNL Campus, Companybagh,
Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel 09
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has filed this writ application for
following reliefs:-
“(I) For issuance of the writ in
nature of Mandamus commanding the
respondent authorities to reinstate the
Patna High Court CWJC No.667 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
petitioner to her post of Sweeper (Safai
Karmi) at the HPCL Muzaffarpur Campus.
(II) For issuance of the writ in
nature of Mandamus declaring the action of
the Respondents orally terminating the
services of the petitioner and preventing her
from performing her duties w.e.f. 01.10.2025
as illegal, arbitrary and non-est in the eye of
law, as the same has been done without the
issuance of a formal written order or show-
cause notice.
(III) For directing the respondents
to pay the arrears of salary and ensure the
payment of Employee Provident Fund (EPF)
contributions as per the records in UAN
101919065623 with mandatory statutory
interest as per Section 7Q of the Employees’
Provident Fund Act, 1952 for the entire
period of delay.
(IV) For directing the respondents
to grant consequential benefits, including
one month salary in lieu of the mandatory
notice period as per the Industrial Dispute
Act.
(V) For any other relief/reliefs, for
which the petitioner is entitled for and/or in
the interest of Justice.”
3. At the very outset, it is submitted by the learned
Patna High Court CWJC No.667 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
counsel for the petitioner that he would be contended with a
direction to the respondent authorities that her representation, as
contained in Annexure-P/2 series, be disposed of by the
authority concerned by a reasoned and speaking order.
4. In the interest of justice and as prayed for by the
learned counsel for the petitioner, let the representation of the
petitioner as contained in Annexure-P/2 series be disposed of by
a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a
period of six weeks from the date of communication of a copy
of this order and the same may be communicated to the
petitioner.
5. Accordingly, the writ application stands disposed of
in the aforesaid terms.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U
Checking your session…