Patna High Court
Md. KamaluddinversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The appellate authority's dismissal order is set aside due to violation of natural justice and non‑payment of subsistence allowance, and the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with consequential benefits.
Summary
The petitioner, a Head Moulvi of Madarsa Amjadia Samiul Uloom, was suspended by the Managing Committee and was not paid subsistence allowance during the suspension. He challenged the suspension before the Special Director, who quashed the suspension and directed the Madarsa Board to investigate the allegations. Subsequent orders by the Board and the appellate authority dismissed the petition without examining the non‑payment of subsistence allowance, violating principles of natural justice as highlighted in Capt. M Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. The Patna High Court held that the dismissal order was vitiated by this breach and set aside the impugned order, directing reinstatement of the petitioner with consequential benefits, while allowing the authorities to re‑examine the allegations in accordance with natural justice. The writ petition was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the dismissal order passed by the appellate authority is valid in view of the non‑payment of subsistence allowance during the departmental inquiry.
- Whether the principles of natural justice were violated in the dismissal of the petitioner.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement and payment of consequential benefits.
Subjects
- suspension
- subsistence allowance
- natural justice
- departmental inquiry
- reinstatement
- Madarsa education
- appellate authority
- quashing order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7425 of 2019
======================================================
Md. Kamaluddin Son of Late Jamaluddin Resident of Village- Bansbari, P.S.-
Balrampur, District- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Higher Education Department,
Vikas Bhawan, Patna.
2. Joint Secretary-cum-Appellate Authority, Education Department, Budh
Marg, Text Book Building, Patna.
3. Special Director, Secondary Education, Vikas Bhawan, Patna.
4. District Education Officer, Katihar.
5. District Programme Officer (Establishment), Katihar.
6. The Chairman, Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna, Vidyapuri
Marg, Patna-1.
7. The Secretary, Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna, Vidyapati
Marg, Patna-1.
8. The Managing Committee of Madarsa Amjadia Samiul Uloom Bansbari,
P.O.- Dangal, P.S.- Balrampur, District- Katihar.
9. Md. Ashraf Son of Late Md. Allauddin Secretary of the present Managing
Committee of Madarsa Amjadia Samiul Uloom, Bansbari, P.S.- Balrampur,
District- Katihar.
10. Asrarul Haque Son of Late Allaf Hussain Incharge Head Moulvi, Madarsa
Amjadia Samiul Uloom Bansbari, P.S.- Balrampur, District- Katihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alim Jang Khan, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madhaw Prasad Yadav (GP-23)
Mr. Arvind Kumar, AC to GP-23
For the Madarsa Board : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
18 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Madarsa
Board.
2. The writ petition has been filed for the following
reliefs :-
“For quashing the order contained in Memo
Patna High Court CWJC No.7425 of 2019(18) dt.09-02-2026
2/6
No.30 dated 12.02.2019 passed by learned Binod
Kumar Singh, Joint Secretary, Education
Department as appellate authority in Appeal No.6
of 2013/30 of 2017 and for quashing the order
contained in Memo No.1172-76 dated 30.09.2011
passed by the Chairman Bihar State Madarsa
Education Board, Patna.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was a Head Moulvi of Madarsa Amjadia Samiul
Uloom Bansbari P.S. Balrampur District-Katihar and was
suspended by the Managing Committee vide resolution dated
13.06.2009, which is said to have been approved by the Bihar
State Madarsa Board, vide order dated 1672-75 dated
20.07.2009.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner was not
paid subsistence allowance during his suspension and this issue
was raised before the Special Director, Secondary Education,
Vikas Bhawan, Patna, in view of direction issued by a Co-
ordinate Bench passed in C.W.J.C. No.14452 of 2009 and on
considering the issues, the Special Director, Secondary
Education, Vikas Bhawan, Patna, quashed the suspension order
passed by the Secretary, Managing Committee of the said
Madarsa, and directed the Bihar State Madarsa Board to
examine the veracity of the allegations at their level and on
finding the allegations to be true, appropriate legal action be
Patna High Court CWJC No.7425 of 2019(18) dt.09-02-2026
3/6
taken, and accordingly, appeal was disposed of.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that in view of the directions issued by the Special Director,
Secondary Education, Human Resource Department, Bihar, and
the Chairman, Bihar State Education Board, Patna, passed an
order dated 30.09.2011 (Annexure-1) without examining the
allegation and the petitioner had to again challenge the said
order by filing writ petition being C.W.J.C. No.362 of 2012, in
which liberty was granted to file an appeal, as per Section 20 of
Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna, before the State
Government.
6. This Court had given a detailed hearing on
16.09.2025 and specific query was made from the counsel and
had directed for bringing on record the materials to show that
the subsistence allowances were paid to this petitioner during
the course of proceedings but despite such direction having been
issued, no such affidavit is said to have been filed explaining the
position, insofar as it relates to the payment of subsistence
allowance. The relevant extract of the order passed by this Court
on 16.09.2025 is quoted as under :-
“4. In view of the judgment rendered by the
Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (1999) 3 SCC 679,
Capt. M Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd.,
Patna High Court CWJC No.7425 of 2019(18) dt.09-02-2026
4/6
where it has been categorically stated that in a
case where the departmental proceeding was
initiated and the delinquent employee is not
provided with subsistence allowance, the entire
process of inquiry undertaken and punishment so
recorded by the competent authority will vitiate in
law.”
7. Learned counsel for the State as also the learned
counsel for the Madarsa Board has appeared and though a very
detailed counter has been filed but the issues which have been
raised by this Court, seeking their response, have not been
answered till date and therefore, this Court is constrained to
examine the issues based on the materials available on record.
8. From perusal of the order impugned, which is
appended with the writ petition as Annexure-1, it appears that
the Joint Director, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna, who
had heard the appeal being Appeal No.06 of 2013 dated
02.05.2017, without examining the issues of violation of
principles of nature justice and its effect on the Departmental
Enquiry owing to non-payment of subsistence allowance, in
light of the Hon’ble Apex Court judgment rendered in Capt. M
Paul Anthony (supra), the Appellate Authority, simply by
referring to the various attending facts and order passed by the
Co-ordinate Benches and various petitions filed before the
Patna High Court CWJC No.7425 of 2019(18) dt.09-02-2026
5/6
appropriate forums by this petitioner, has tried to justify the
order of dismissal but the legal question, which has been raised
in this case in reference to payment of subsistence allowance
during the course of inquiry to this petitioner, based on which
the dismissal order has been passed, and without holding fresh
inquiry, as per the direction of Special Director dated
22.05.2010, has simply relied upon the same material to pass the
impugned order, which is not sustainable in law and even during
the course of hearing of this case, the liberty which was given to
them, to controvert the finding of non-payment of subsistence
allowance, which is apparent from the order passed by the
Special Director, as contained in Memo No.62 dated
22.05.2010, has not been denied and accordingly, this Court
finds that there has been gross violation of principles of natural
justice, while arriving to a conclusion with regard to passing of
dismissal order and therefore, this Court has no hesitation in
setting aside the order as contained in Memo No.30 dated
12.02.2019 and the authorities are directed to reinstate this
petitioner back into service and to pay the consequential
benefits for which, the petition is found entitled in law.
9. However, the authorities are put at liberty to
examine the correctness of allegation, in accordance with law
Patna High Court CWJC No.7425 of 2019(18) dt.09-02-2026
6/6
and if the authorities proposes to do so, then the same can be
done by strictly adhering to the principles of natural justice.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U
Checking your session…