Patna High Court
Ajay Kumar MallikversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
Holding
The appeal is set aside and the matter remitted to the Single Judge for fresh consideration with an opportunity of hearing.
Summary
The appellant, Ajay Kumar Mallik, filed a writ petition seeking a compassionate appointment in the Purnea Nagar Nigam after his mother, a Safai Sevika, died. The Single Judge dismissed the petition relying on a 2021 State Government circular that denied such appointments, without hearing the appellant or considering his rejoinder and supplementary affidavits. The appellant appealed, contending that the dismissal violated the principles of natural justice and that the affidavits should have been examined. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the appellant must be given an opportunity to be heard on the merits before any final order is passed. Consequently, the appellate court set aside the Single Judge’s order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, directing an expeditious disposal without unnecessary adjournments.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to a compassionate appointment under the applicable administrative rules.
- Whether the dismissal of the writ petition without hearing the appellant violates the principles of natural justice.
- Whether the State Government circular alone suffices to deny the compassionate appointment.
Subjects
- compassionate appointment
- natural justice
- administrative circular
- municipal corporation
- employment
- writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1186 of 2025
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16298 of 2023
======================================================
Ajay Kumar Mallik Son of Gouri Mallik and Babli Mehtarani @ Babli Devi,
resident of village- Sahwan Tola, Brajesh Nagar, Ward No. 7, P.S. - K.Hat,
District- Purnea.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and
Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Purnea.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Kr. Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9
Mr. Yogesh Kumar, AC to SC-9
For the Purnea Nagar Nigam : Mr. Prince Kumar Mishra, Advocate
Ms. Priyanka Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 01-04-2026
This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging
the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 04.12.2025 in
C.W.J.C. No. 16298 of 2023.
2. The prayer of the appellant in the writ petition is to
appoint him on compassionate ground on a suitable post under
the Purnea Nagar Nigam in which the mother of the appellant
was working as Safai Sevika on regular basis, who died in
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1186 of 2025 dt.01-04-2026
2/4
harness on 25.07.2017.
3. After issuance of notice, counter affidavit was filed
on behalf of Respondent No.2, the City Manager, Municipal
Corporation, Purnea. The appellant thereupon filed a rejoinder
to the said counter affidavit and then a supplementary affidavit
was also filed by the appellant and then a counter affidavit was
filed on behalf of Respondent No.1 i.e. the Project Officer-cum-
Deputy Director, Urban Development and Housing Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. When the matter was taken up on 04.12.2025, the
learned counsel for the appellant was not present. However, the
learned Single Judge after hearing the learned counsel for the
Purnea Nagar Nigam and considering the circular of the State
Government contained in Letter No. 13573 dated 15.11.2021 of
the Principal Secretary, General Administration Department,
Government of Bihar came to hold that the appellant is not
entitled for employment on compassionate ground and
accordingly, dismissed the writ petition.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
no doubt, the counsel for the appellant was not present but when
the learned Single Judge, in the absence of the appellant or his
counsel has taken up the matter on merit, he should have
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1186 of 2025 dt.01-04-2026
3/4
considered the rejoinder affidavit filed by the appellant to the
counter affidavit and also the supplementary affidavit filed on
behalf of the appellant, which are in relation to that particular
letter, which has been taken into account by the learned Single
Judge in refusing to grant relief and having not considered the
same; the case of the appellant needs to be remanded for fresh
consideration in accordance with law.
6. The learned counsel for the respondents, however,
supported the impugned judgment.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the respective
parties and going through the pleadings, in the fitness of things,
we are of the view that the appellant needs to be given an
opportunity of hearing on merits of the case before passing the
final order.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the matter is remitted back to be decided by the learned Single
Judge having roster. Since the matter is of the year 2023 and the
pleadings are complete, it is expected that the expeditious steps
would be taken for disposal of the writ petition without granting
unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.
Parties shall be at liberty to raise all the points before
the learned Single Judge.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1186 of 2025 dt.01-04-2026
4/4
9. Accordingly, the Letters Patent Appeal is disposed
of.
10. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall also
stand disposed of.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
(Harish Kumar, J)
shailendra/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 03.04.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…