Dismissed¶¶42

Sanjay Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Apr 2026CWJC/18781/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chaukidar compassionate appointment; Bihar Chaukidar Cadre (Amendment) Rules 2014; Rule-5 Sub-Rule (Ka); void ab initio; unconstitutional rule no prospective application; Articles 14 and 16 Constitution; Devmuni Paswan vs. State of Bihar 2023 (2) PLJR 425; SLP (C) 18983 of 2023 dismissed 19.3.2025; mandamus for appointment letter; Selection Committee recommendation 4.6.2022; Patna High Court CWJC No.18781 of 2024; application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

On a Rule being declared unconstitutional, its effect is that it is void ab initio, and there can be no question of its having been set aside prospectively; accordingly, the contention that the Devmuni Paswan judgment (dated 25.2.2023) would not retrospectively affect the petitioner's recommendation of 4.6.2022 has no force and is rejected. ¶¶39

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18781 of 2024

¶2

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

¶3

Sanjay Kumar Singh Son of Sri Harinarayan Singh Resident of Village Ward no. 09, Baghmari Harnahia and P.S. Sursand, District-Sitamarhi.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the principal secretary Home Department, Government of Bihar at Patna.

¶7

The District Collector-Cum-Chairman, Compassionate Appointment Committee, District-Sitamarhi.

¶8

The Additional Collector, Sitamarhi.

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, District-Sitamarhi.

¶10

The Deputy Development Commissioner, District-Sitamarhi.

¶11

The Deputy Collector (Establishment), District-Sitamarhi.

¶12

The In-Charge Officer, General Administration Section, District-Sitamarhi.

¶13

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Belsand, District-Sitamarhi.

¶14

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Pupri, District-Sitamarhi.

¶15

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi, District-Sitamarhi.

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

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

¶18

Appearance :

¶19

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bhola Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Swapnil Kumar Singh, AC to GP-19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶20

3 20-04-2026

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶22

counsel for the respondents.

¶23

The petitioner has filed the instant application for

¶24

the following reliefs :-

¶25

“A. For issuance of a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ commanding the authorities concerned to issue appointment letter in the terms of the selection-

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.18781 of 2024(3) dt.20-04-2026 2/4

¶27

list prepared in the terms of Rule-5, Sub-Rule (Ka) of the Bihar Chaukidari Cadre (Amendment) Rules, 2014.

¶28

B. For passing any other order/direction/s or appropriate Writ/s in the facts and circumstances of the instant Case.”

¶29

The case of the petitioner in brief is that his father

¶30

who was working as a Chaukidar , prior to his retirement on 28.2.2021 filed an application on 28.11.2020 recommending the petitioner for his appointment in terms of the Bihar Chaukidar Cadre (Amendment) Rules, 2014 which had the provision for appointment of a Chaukidar on compassionate ground.

¶31

It is the case of the petitioner that along with others the case of the petitioner came to be considered by the Selection Committee headed by the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi in its meeting held on 4.6.2022. The name of the petitioner figures at serial no.18 of the minutes of the said meeting wherein the Committee recommended him for appointment.

¶32

Bereft of unnecessary details, it may be mentioned here that the aforesaid Rules of 2014 came for consideration by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Devmuni Paswan vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. ; 2023 (2) PLJR 425 wherein this Court held that the provisions contained therein is contrary to the express provisions of the Constitution and holding the same

¶33

Patna High Court CWJC No.18781 of 2024(3) dt.20-04-2026 3/4

¶34

to be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, the Rules were set aside.

¶35

It may be mentioned here itself that the said judgment was challenged in the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLA (C) no. 18983 of 2023 [Bihar Rajya Dafadar Chaukidar Panchayat (Magadh Division) vs. State of Bihar & Ors.] and by order dated 19.3.2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition.

¶36

It is submitted by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the Committee having considered and recommended for appointment of the petitioner in its meeting on 4.6.2022 itself on which date the Rules of 2014 were in existence and the same having been set aside much later on the passing of the judgment in the case of Devmuni Paswan ( supra ) on 25.2.2023, the judgment would not have a retrospective application on the case of the petitioner and as such the respondents be directed to issue the letter of appointment appointing the petitioner on the post of Chaukidar .

¶37

It may be stated here that in the opinion of the Court, the contention of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has no force and is fit to be rejected. On a Rule being declared unconstitutional the effect would be of it being void ab

¶38

Patna High Court CWJC No.18781 of 2024(3) dt.20-04-2026 4/4

¶39

initio and thus there can be no question of the same having been set aside prospectively.

¶40

The Court having held the Rules of 2014 to be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and having set aside the same, no relief as prayed by the petitioner can be

¶41

granted.

¶42

The application is dismissed.

¶43

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶44

avinash/-

¶45

Sanjay Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Birendra Baitha Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Kumar Singh @ Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Uttam Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Awdhesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Tananjay Prakash Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar