Rehana Parveen Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rehana Parveen Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty granted to the appellant to invoke Civil Review remedy, if he so advised; all pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant made out a case warranting interference with the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22.03.2024 passed in CWJC No.3717 of 2016. +1 more

Court's answer

The appellant has not made out a case so as to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22.03.2024 in CWJC No.3717 of 2016; the Letters Patent Appeal is accordingly rejected (dismissed).

Ratio / Principle

Reasoning for refusal to interfere: the Single Judge had rendered his decision in open Court, and the appellant's counsel in the writ petition was not the same counsel appearing in the present LPA; the Court therefore stated it was not aware what transpired on 22.03.2024 between the Bench and Bar, and the contention of factual error urged by the present counsel was not accepted.

Key takeaways

Liberty is granted to the appellant to invoke the Civil Review remedy, if so advised, and all pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Letters Patent Appeal No.426 of 2024 (High Court of Judicature at Patna, arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3717 of 2016), oral order dated 15-10-2025, Per Honourable the Chief Justice (P. B. Bajanthri) with Honourable Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Sinha. Rehana Parveen Md. Sahjahan assailed the learned Single Judge's order dated 22.03.2024 passed in her writ petition; her appeal counsel (Mr. Wasi Akhtar) contended that the Single Judge had committed an error on factual aspects. The Court observed that the Single Judge had rendered his decision in open Court, and that the appellant's counsel in the writ petition was not the same counsel in the LPA, so the Court was not aware what transpired on 22.03.2024 between the Bench and Bar. Holding that the appellant had not made out a case so as to interfere with the Single Judge's order, the Court declined interference (appeal dismissed), granted liberty to invoke the Civil Review remedy if so advised, and directed that all pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of. No statutory provision or precedent was cited in the order.

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Rehana Parveen Md. Sahjahan¶5
Mr. Wasi Akhtar
respondent
The State of Bihar¶8
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
The Director, Jan Shiksha, Department of Education, Government of Bihar¶9
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
State Program Officer, Bihar Education Project Council, Shiksha Bhawan, Rashtrabhasa Parishad¶10
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
The District Magistrate, Begusarai¶11
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
District Education Officer, Begusarai¶12
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
The District Program Officer, Primary Education and Literacy, Begusarai¶13
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
Block Education Officer, Barauni, Begusarai¶14
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
Headmaster, Primary School, Pipradih, Ward No. 11, Block - Barauni, DistBegusarai¶15
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
Md. Ali Akbar, Headmaster, Primary School, Pipradih, Ward No. 11, Block - Barauni, Dist-Begusarai¶16
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)
respondent
Smt. Sahun Sultan, W/o Md. Ali Akbar, working as Swaymsevika under Talim Markaj Scheme, Primary School, Pipradih, Ward No. 11, BlockBarauni, Dist- Begusarai¶17
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13), Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh (Sr.), Mr. Raj Dular Sah
respondent
Md. Shamsher Alam, S/o not known, working as Swaymsevak under Talim Markaj Scheme, Primary School, Pipradih, Ward No. 11, Block- Barauni, Dist- Begusarai¶18
Mr. Additional Advocate General (13), Ms. Anjanaya Singh (AC to AAG-13)

Coram

AI extract

P. B. Bajanthri (Chief Justice)author¶26
Alok Kumar Sinhamember¶27