Disposed¶32

Sudhanshu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Feb 2026CWJC/1754/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

STET 2025 Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB); answer key objection form; anomalies in evaluation; normalization principles; advertisement no. PR 218/2025; writ of mandamus sought; disposal by direction to file detailed representation within one week and adjudication within two weeks; Sudhanshu Kumar v. State of Bihar & Ors.; Patna High Court CWJC No.1754 of 2026; Justice Ajit Kumar; decision dt. 03-02-2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ application disposed of with observations and directions: petitioner to file a detailed representation (referring to his earlier representation, and raising the normalization issue per advertisement if not already raised) within one week; the representation to be adjudicated within two weeks of its filing, with further action to follow if petitioner is found eligible. ¶32

Sudhanshu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1754 of 2026

¶2

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

¶3

Sudhanshu Kumar Son of Awadhesh Sharma, Resident of Village and PostAranda, P.S.-Obra, District-Aurangabad, Bihar.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna.

¶7

Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Buddh Marg, Patna, Bihar-800017.

¶9

The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Buddh Marg, Patna, Bihar-800017.

¶10

The Examination Controller, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Buddh Marg, Patna, Bihar-800017.

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance :

¶14

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Advocate Mr. Abhas Chandra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Government Pleader (24)

¶15

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

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶17

2 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶18

learned counsel for the respondents.

¶19

2.The instant writ application has been filed for the following relief:-

¶20

a) For issuance of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, or direction/directions to the Respondent Board to consider the submission of the Objection Form raised by the Petitioner through Official Portal in Secondary Teacher Eligibility Test (STET)- 2025 conducted by Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB).

¶21

b) For a direction to Respondent Board to consider the Objection and rectify the anomalies in the evaluation process of the said test.

¶22

c) For a direction to Respondent Board to provide Revised Answer Key of the Petitioner after considering her Objection Form.

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.1754 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026 2/3

¶24

d) For further pass any other order/orders in shape of consequential relief to the Petitioner may be found to legally entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite this petitioner having given authoritative answers to the questions, still he has secured 63 marks and, whereas, the objections with respect more than 30 questions with authoritative answer have already been provided still, such objections have not been adjudicated.

¶26

It is next submitted that even the principles of normalization, which also forms part of the advertisement no. PR 218/2025, appears not to have been invoked in the case of the petitioner.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bihar School Examination Board, submits that since the appropriate representation with objections have already been filed, the petitioner may be directed to file a detailed representation in the light of the order passed by this Court and, on filing of such representation within the time so fixed, the same shall be adjudicated and necessary order shall be passed and, if the petitioner is found eligible then further action shall be taken. Learned counsel for the B.S.E.B. further submits

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.1754 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026 3/3

¶29

that the experts have already been employed for adjudicating the objections and once such objections are there, the same shall be adjudicated.

¶30

Considering the submissions of the parties, this Court is of the view that instead of keeping this matter pending, the petitioner be directed to file representation with all such details for adjudication within a period of one week, referring to his earlier representation, which is said to have been filed and, even the issues of normalization in terms of the advertisement may also be raised, if the same has not been raised for consideration by the authorities concerned.

¶31

On filing such representation, the representation so filed by the petitioner, shall be adjudicated within a period of two weeks from the date of filing of such representation by the petitioner.

¶32

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ application stands disposed of.

¶33

(Ajit Kumar, J)

¶34

shikha/-

¶35

Sudhanshu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhanshu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Aslam Ansari Vs The State of Bihar

Shashinath Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Sanju Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Kaushal Kishore Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Ayodhya Yadav Vs The State of Bihar