Nisheeth ChandrachoorversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9772 of 2026
                 ======================================================
                 Nisheeth Chandrachoor S/o Shri Vinod Kumar Jaiswal, Resident of Kotwali
                 Chowk, Ganj no 2, PO and PS Bettiah, District West Champaran, Pin 845438.

                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
           2.    The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government
                 of Bihar, Patna.
           3.    The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar,
                 Patna.
           4.    The Bihar Public Service Commission through its Secretary, 15 Jawaharlal
                 Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna.
           5.    The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15 Jawaharlal Nehru
                 Marg, Bailey Road, Patna.
           6.    The Examination Controller, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15,
                 Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, patna.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr. Abhijeet Abhigyan, Adv.
                 For the Respondent/s   :      Mr. Ramadhar Singh, GP-5
                 For the BPSC           :      Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Adv.
                                               Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha, Adv.
                                               Mr. Prabhakar Pahepuri, Adv.
                  =====================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   07-07-2026                 Heard Mr. Abhijeet Abhigyan, learned Advocate for

                   the petitioner; learned Advocate for the State; and Mr. Sanjay

                   Pandey, learned Advocate for the Bihar Public Service

                   Commission.

                               2. The petitioner is aggrieved with the part of the

                   notification dated 05.05.2026 issued by the Bihar Public Service

                   Commission whereby all 101 posts of Sub-Divisional Protection

                   Officer have been reserved exclusively for women candidates.
Patna High Court CWJC No.9772 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
                                            2/3




          The petitioner further seeks a declaration that the reservation of

          100% of the posts of Sub-Divisional Protection Officer in

          favour of women candidates is unconstitutional, arbitrary and

          violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

                      3. Assailing the notification dated 05.05.2026, learned

          Advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon various

          decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and has contended with

          all   his    vehemence        that      the    Bihar   Protection   Service

          (Recruitment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2025 (hereinafter

          referred to as "the Rules, 2025") are contrary to the provisions

          of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

          (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 2005"). It is further

          contended that while Section 8 of the Act, 2005 merely provides

          that, as far as practicable, preference shall be given to women

          while appointing Protection Officers whereas Rule 4(2) of the

          Rules, 2025 mandates that all cadre posts of Sub-Divisional

          Protection Officer shall be filled up exclusively by women

          candidates. It is, therefore, contended that the said Rule travels

          beyond the scope of the parent statute and is consequently ultra

          vires the Act, 2005 as well as the Constitution of India.

                      4. Per contra, learned Advocates appearing for the

          State as well as the Commission submitted that the impugned
          Patna High Court CWJC No.9772 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
                                                      3/3




                    notification has been issued strictly in accordance with the

                    provisions of the Rules, 2025. It is further submitted that Rule

                    4(2) unequivocally provides that all cadre posts shall be filled

                    up by women candidates and, admittedly, the validity of the said

                    Rule has not been challenged in the present writ petition.

                                5. Having considered the submissions advanced by

                    the learned Advocates for the respective parties, this court finds

                    substance in the submissions led by learned Advocate for the

                    Commission. Since the impugned notification has been issued in

                    conformity with the provisions of the Rules, 2025, no

                    interference is called for in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of

                    this Court. However, it shall be open to the petitioner to

                    challenge the validity of the relevant provisions of the Rules,

                    2025, if so advised.

                                6. With the aforesaid liberty and observation, the writ

                    petition stands disposed of.



                                               (Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-

U