Disposed

Subodh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC2 Feb 2022CWJC/1389/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought withdrawal of a writ petition invoking writ jurisdiction in the Public Interest Litigation, with liberty to file a representation before the Director, Mass Education, Government of Bihar, for redressal of grievances. The Court accepted the withdrawal.

What did the court decide?

Petition withdrawn; liberty to approach Director, Mass Education, Bihar, within four weeks to file representation; authority to dispose within four months.

Subodh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Public Procurement and Tenders | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1389 of 2022

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Subodh Kumar S/o Mohan Das, Resident of Village - Maraiya, P.O. - Pipra Latif, P.S. - Parbatta, District - Khagaria.

¶4

Nirodh Das, S/o Mohan Das, Resident of Village - Maraiya, P.O. - Pipra Latif, P.S. and Block - Parbatta, District - Khagaria.

¶5

Sangita Rani, W/o Sanjay Jayaswal, Resident of Village - Sadhopur, P.O. - Baisi, Jahangirpur, P.S. - Rangra Chauk, District - Bhagalpur.

¶6

Veena Pani, W/o Chandeshwar Prasad Sah, Resident of Village - Parsaha, P.O. - Nariyar, P.S. - Kahra, District - Saharsa.

¶7

Sanjay Kumar Jayasawal, Son of Ramvilash Jayasawal, Resident of Village - Sadhopur, P.O. - Baisi Jahangirpur, P.S. - Rangra Chauk, District - Bhagalpur.

¶8

Hemchandra Sah, S/o Uchitlal Sah, Resident of Village - Shahpur, Panchayat - Himatnagar, P.O. - Angerhat, Via- Sontha Hat, Dist. - Kishanganj.

¶9

Rupa Devi, Wife of Hemchandra Sah, Resident of Village - Shahpur, Panchayat - Himatnagar, P.O. - Angerhat, Via - Sontha Hat, Dist. - Kishanganj.

¶10

Bijay Kumar Sah, Son of Devnarayan Sah, Resident of Village and Post - Chakia, P.S. and Dist. - Kishanganj.

¶11

Abdul Karim, S/o Abdul Razzak, Resident of Village - Girda, P.O. - Bochagaon, P.S. - Jalalghar, Dist. - Purnea.

¶12

Nadeem Akhtar, Son of Shamsul Hoda, Resident of Village - Chakia Ghat, P.S. and Dist. - Kishanganj.

¶13

Ranjeet Singh, Son of Suresh Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Hario, P.S. - Bihpur, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶14

Animesh Kumar, Son of Sikandra Sah, Resident of Village - Bharosa Singh Tola, P.O. - Kadwa Diyara, P.S. - Naugachhiya, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶15

Kamal Kumar Ghose, Son of Agam Lal Ghose Resident of Village - Barahmasiya, Post - Bagalbari, P.S. - Kochadhaman, Dist. - Kishanganj.

¶16

Dilip Kumar, Son of Late Dhanik Lal Mandal, Resident of Village and Post - Chandrahi, Via - Dhamdaha, Dist. - Purnea.

¶17

Rekha Kumari @ Rekha Devi, Wife of Janardan Mehta, Resident of Village and Post - Chandrahi Dhamdaha, Dist. - Purnea.

¶18

Premlata Devi, Wife of Ummesh Mehta, Resident of Village and P.O. - Chandrahi, Via - Dhamdaha, Dist. - Purnea.

¶19

Kiran Kumari, D/o Darjan Prasad Singh, Wife of Kumod Kumar Singh, Resident of Village - Bharatkhand Daurhi, Post - Bharatkhand, P.S. - Block - Parbatta, Dist. - Khagaria.

¶20

Rajkishor Ray, Son of Feku Ray, Resident of Village - Borwa Tola, P.O. - Kadwa Diyara, P.S. - Naugachhiya, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶21

Rajeev Kumar, Son of Feku Ray, Resident of Village - Borwa Tola, P.O. -

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022 2/13

¶23

Kadwa Diyara, P.S. - Naugachhiya, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶24

Shivnandan Singh, Son of Bianchi Singh, Resident of Village - Borwa Tola, P.O. - Kadwa Diyara, P.S. - Naugachhiya, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶25

Bijnandan Roy, Son of Late Ganesh Prasad Roy, Resident of Village - Kadwa Pratap Nagar, P.O. - Kadwa Diyara, P.S. - Naugachhiya, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶26

Ashok Kumar, Son of Late Gopal Prasad Mandal, Resident of Village - Bihar Singh Tola Dova, P.O. - Dova, P.S. - Rupauli, Dist. - Purnea.

¶27

Rajesh Kumar, Son of Sri Birendra Prasad Mandal, Resident of Village - Bara, P.O. - Mohan, P.S. - Simraha, Dist. - Araria.

¶28

Rukhsana Khatoon, D/o Md. Rais, Resident of Village - Sultanpur, P.O. - Pipra Latif, P.S. and Block - Parbatta, Dist. - Khagaria.

¶29

Meena Devi, Wife of Nirmal Kumar Yadav, Resident of Village - Kilpara, Post - Piyaji, P.S. - Routa, Dist. - Purnea, Presently residing at Naya Tola Line Bazar, P.S. - K.Hat, Dist. - Purnea.

¶30

Randhir Kumar @ Randhir Kumar Yadav, Son of Late Shashi Bhushan, Resident of Village - Dulalganj, Post - Hafanea, P.S. - Amour, Dist. - Purnea, presently residing at Line Bazar Jhanda Chowk Purnea, P.S. - K.Hat, Dist. - Purnea.

¶31

Sangeeta Kumari, D/o Sachidanand Singh, Resident of Village - Milkichak, Post - Jankinagar, P.S. - Naya Ramnagar, Dist. - Munger.

¶32

Hari Narayan Das, Son of Mukund Kumar Das, Resident of Village - Kolha, Post - Runki, P.S. - Routa, Dist. - Purnea.

¶33

Hindeshwar Prasad Das, Son of Mukund Kumar Das, Resident of Village - Kolha, Post - Runki, P.S. - Routa, Dist. - Purnea.

¶34

Subodh Prasad Singh, Son of Sri Indradev Singh Resident of Village - Baghar, Post - Charuipar, Via - Noorsarai, Dist. - Nalanda.

¶35

Md. Badiuzzama, Son of Md. Nazir Uddin, Resident of Village - Sakrama, P.S. - Sanhoula, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶36

Bambam Kumar Pathak, Son of Wakil Pahtak Resident of Village and P.O. - Marwa, P.S. - Bihpur, Dist. - Bhagalpur - 853201.

¶37

Shambhu Pathak, Son of Wakil Pathak, Resident of Village and P.O. - Marwa, P.S. - Bihpur, Dist. - Bhagalpur - 853201.

¶38

Rajesh Kumar Jha, Son of Devendra Jha, Resident of Village - Kumaitha, P.S. - Bath, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶39

Md. Shamshuzzoha Ansari, Son of Md. Sagir Ahmad Ansari, Resident of Village - Belkhoriya, P.O. - Dariya, P.S. - Madhusudanpur, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶40

Md. Zulfakar Ali, Son of Md. Sagir Ahmad Ansari, Resident of Village - Belkhoriya, P.O. - Dariya, P.S. - Madhusudanpur, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶41

Md. Mushtaque Alam, Son of Md. Younus, Resident of Village - Belkhoriya, P.O. - Dariya, P.S. - Madhusudanpur, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

¶42

Anwar Azmi, Son of Talim Hussain, Resident of Village and P.O. - Teosa, Ward No. 14, P.S. and Dist. - Kishanganj.

¶43

Sanjay Singh, Son of Bharat Singh, Resident of Village and P.O. - Khairwar,

¶44

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022 3/13

¶45

P.S. and Block - Revilganj, Dist. - Chapra.

¶46

Bahadur Ram, Son of Late Ram Pravesh Ram, Resident of Village and P.O. - Khairwar, P.S. and Block - Revilganj, Dist. - Chapra.

¶47

Sheo Mangal Ram, Sonof Bhukhal Ram, Resident of Village - Semariya Khurd, P.O. - Natwar Semariya, P.S. - Revilganj, Dist. - Chapra.

¶48

Md. Jakir Alam, Son of Shekh Meharuddin, Resident of Village - Jhajhiyan, P.O. - Sountha, P.S. - Jalalgarh, Dist. - Purnea.

¶49

Sujeet Kumar, Son of Govind Yadav, Resident of Village and P.O. - Nirpur, P.S. - Dhamdaha, Dist. - Purnea - 854203.

¶50

Nutan Kumari, Wife of Sujeet Kumar, Resident of Village and P.O. - Nirpur, P.S. - Dhamdaha, Dist. - Purnea - 854203.

¶51

Nibha Kumari, Wife of Ajay Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Mathurapur, P.O. - Khajraitha, Dist. - Khagaria.

¶52

Ram Narayan Das, Son of Mohan Das, Resident of Village - Dhanchhuhi, P.O. - Baragaw, P.S. - Konch, Dist. -Gaya.

¶53

Meena Sinha, Wife of Uday Kumar Ray, Resident of Village - Rupaspu, P.S. - Konch, Dist. - Gaya.

¶54

Ramdip Chaudhary, Son of Bal Kishun Chaudhary, Resident of Village - Shanaganj, P.O. - Mau, P.S. - Konch, Dist. - Gaya.

¶55

Babita Kumari, D/o Rajendra Prasad Rajak, Wife of Bachan Prasad, Resident of Village and P.O. - Gauharpur, P.S. - Konch, Dist. - Gaya.

¶56

Anil Kumar, Son of Sri Ajeshwar Prasad, Resident of Village - Markhabad, P.O. - Pandarak, P.S. - Pandarak, Dist. - Patna.

¶57

Rabindra Kumar, Son of Ramdeo Prasad, Resident of Village - Gope Kita, P.O. - Pandarak, P.S. - Pandarak, Dist. - Patna.

¶58

Uzra Khatoon, Wife of Imtiyaz Ahmad, Resident of Village- Chandi, P.O. and P.S. - Barh, Dist. - Patna.

¶59

Kiran Devi, Wife of Nawal Kishore Yadav, Resident of Village - Narsingh Bag, Ward No. 1, P.O. - Bakhari, P.S. and Dist. - Madhepura - 821140

¶60

... ... Petitioner/s

¶61

Versus

¶62

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resource Development Cum Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶63

The Director, Mass Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶64

... ... Respondent/s

¶65

=============== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s	========== : Mr.	============================= Shashi Shekhar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Respondent/s ===============	: Mr. ==========	Prabhakar Jha, G.P.-27 =============================

¶66

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022 4/13

¶67

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶68

======================================================= (The proceedings of the Court are being conducted by Hon’ble the Chief Justice/ Hon’ble Judges through Video Conferencing from their residential ofÏces/residences. Also, the Advocates and the Staffs joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residences/ofÏces.)

¶69

=======================================================

¶70

Date : 02-02-2022

¶71

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶72

Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-

¶73

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022

¶74

5/13

¶75

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022

¶76

6/13

¶77

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022

¶78

7/13

¶79

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022 8/13

¶80

After the matter was heard for some time, finding the Bench not to be agreeable with the submissions made across the Bar, more so, on account of delay and laches, learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, seeks permission to withdraw the present petition reserving liberty to approach the Respondent No. 3, namely the Director, Mass Education, Government of Bihar, Patna by filing a representation venting out his grievance, subject matter of the present lis , which the petitioners shall be filing within a period of four weeks from today.

¶81

Learned counsel for the respondents states that if such a representation is filed by the petitioners, the authority

¶82

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022 9/13

¶83

concerned shall consider and dispose it of expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months from the date of its filing along with a copy of this order.

¶84

Statement accepted and taken on record.

¶85

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in D. N. Jeevaraj

¶86

Vs. Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka & Ors, (2016)

¶87

2 SCC 653 , paragraphs 34 to 38 observed as under:-

¶88

“ 34 . The learned counsel for the parties addressed us on the question of the bona fides of Nagalaxmi Bai in filing a public interest litigation. We leave this question open and do not express any opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the decision of the High Court in this regard.

¶89

35 . However, we note that generally speaking, procedural technicalities ought to take a back seat in public interest litigation. This Court held in Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P. [ Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P. , 1989 Supp (1) SCC 504] to this effect as follows: (SCC p. 515, para 16)

¶90

“ 16 . The writ petitions before us are not inter parties disputes and have been raised by way of public interest litigation and the controversy before the court is as to whether for social safety and for creating a hazardless environment for the people to live in, mining in the area should be permitted or stopped. We may not be taken to have said that for public interest litigations, procedural laws do not apply. At the same time it has to be remembered that every technicality in the procedural law is not available as a defence when a matter of grave public importance is for consideration before the court.”

¶91

36 . A considerable amount has been said about public interest litigation in R&M Trust [ R&M Trust v. Koramangala Residents Vigilance Group , (2005) 3 SCC 91] and it is not necessary for us to dwell any further on this except to say that in issues

¶92

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022

¶93

10/13

¶94

pertaining to good governance, the courts ought to be somewhat more liberal in entertaining public interest litigation. However, in matters that may not be of moment or a litigation essentially directed against one organisation or individual (such as the present litigation which was directed only against Sadananda Gowda and later Jeevaraj was impleaded) ought not to be entertained or should be rarely entertained. Other remedies are also available to public spirited litigants and they should be encouraged to avail of such remedies.

¶95

37. In such cases, that might not strictly fall in the category of public interest litigation and for which other remedies are available, insofar as the issuance of a writ of mandamus is concerned, this Court held in Union of India v. S.B. Vohra [ Union of India v. S.B. Vohra , (2004) 2 SCC 150: 2004 SCC (L&S) 363] that: (SCC p. 160, paras 12-13)

¶96

“ 12 . Mandamus literally means a command. The essence of mandamus in England was that it was a royal command issued by the King's Bench (now Queen's Bench) directing performance of a public legal duty.

¶97

13 . A writ of mandamus is issued in favour of a person who establishes a legal right in himself. A writ of mandamus is issued against a person who has a legal duty to perform but has failed and/or neglected to do so. Such a legal duty emanates from either in discharge of a public duty or by operation of law. The writ of mandamus is of a most extensive remedial nature. The object of mandamus is to prevent disorder from a failure of justice and is required to be granted in all cases where law has established no specific remedy and whether justice despite demanded has not been granted.”

¶98

38. A salutary principle or a well-recognised rule that needs to be kept in mind before issuing a writ of mandamus was stated in Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. Union of India [ Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. Union of India , (1974) 2 SCC 630] in the following words: (SCC pp. 641-42, paras 24-25)

¶99

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022 11/13

¶100

“ 24 . … The powers of the High Court under Article 226 are not strictly confined to the limits to which proceedings for prerogative writs are subject in English practice. Nevertheless, the well-recognised rule that no writ or order in the nature of a mandamus would issue when there is no failure to perform a mandatory duty applies in this country as well. Even in cases of alleged breaches of mandatory duties, the salutary general rule, which is subject to certain exceptions, applied by us, as it is in England, when a writ of mandamus is asked for, could be stated as we find it set out in Halsbury's Laws of England (3rd Edn.), Vol. 11, p. 106:

¶101

‘198. Demand for performance must precede application .—As a general rule the order will not be granted unless the party complained of has known what it was he was required to do, so that he had the means of considering whether or not he should comply, and it must be shown by evidence that there was a distinct demand of that which the party seeking the mandamus desires to enforce, and that that demand was met by a refusal.’

¶102

25 . In the cases before us there was no such demand or refusal. Thus, no ground whatsoever is shown here for the issue of any writ, order, or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution.”

¶103

As such, petition stands disposed of in the

¶104

following terms:-

¶105

(a) Petitioners shall approach the authority concerned i.e. Respondent No. 3 namely the Director, Mass

¶106

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022 12/13

¶107

Education, Government of Bihar, Patna within a period of four weeks from today by filing a representation for redressal of the grievance(s);

¶108

(b) The said authority shall consider and dispose it of expeditiously by a reasoned and speaking order preferably within a period of four months from the date of its filing along with a copy of this order;

¶109

¶110

(d) Needless to add, while considering such representation, principles of natural justice shall be followed and due opportunity of hearing afforded to the parties;

¶111

(e) Also, opportunity to place on record all relevant materials/documents shall be granted to the parties;

¶112

(f) Equally, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law;

¶113

(g) We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law, before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch;

¶114

(h) Liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach

¶115

Patna High Court CWJC No.1389 of 2022 dt.02-02-2022 13/13

¶116

the appropriate forum/Court, should the need so arise subsequently on the same and subsequent cause of action;

¶117

(i) We have not expressed any opinion on merits.

¶118

All issues are left open;

¶119

(j) The proceedings, during the time of current Pandemic- Covid-19 shall be conducted through digital mode, unless the parties otherwise mutually agree to meet in person i.e. physical mode;

¶120