Disposed¶32

Maya Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Feb 2026CWJC/2150/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

STET-25; Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB); answer key released 24.11.2025; objection form via official portal; revised answer key; representations dated 06.01.2026 and 07.01.2026; Annexure-P/6; Examination Controller as competent authority; identical writ petitions; fresh representation within two weeks; reasoned and speaking order within four weeks; writ petition disposed. Bench: Harish Kumar, J. Case: CWJC No.2150 of 2026, Patna High Court, decided 10-02-2026. Outcome: disposed with directions to Examination Controller, BSEB.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the Examination Controller, BSEB (respondent no.5) within two weeks; the Examination Controller to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the objection within a further period of four weeks.

Maya Kumari Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2150 of 2026

¶2

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

¶3

Maya Kumari Daughter of Sheo Dayal Singh, resident of Village- Diliyan, Post-Karwa, P.S.- Udwant Nagar, District- Bhojpur, Bihar

¶4

Sandhya Mourya Daughter of Chandra Kishor Singh, resident of Bakshu Shahid Baba Gali. PO and P.S.- Buxar, District- Buxar, Bihar

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

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

¶8

Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mujtabul Haque, GP-12 For the BSEB : Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Adv. ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶15

2 10-02-2026 Heard the parties.

¶16

The petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of

¶17

this Court seeking following reliefs:

¶18

“(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 petitioners through the Official Portal in Secondary Teacher Eligibility Test (STET) – 25 conducted by the Bihar School

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.2150 of 2026(2) dt.10-02-2026 2/3

¶20

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 his Objection Form.

¶23

(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.”

¶24

Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that despite the fact the respondent Bihar School Examination Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BSEB’) has released answer key for the STET-25 on Official Website of the BSEB on 24.11.2025 and allowed the candidates to raise objections through official Website and in the light of the aforesaid instruction, the petitioners have downloaded their response/objection from the official Website categorically stating that they should be given more marks, till date no decision has been taken.

¶25

For redressal of the grievance, the petitioners have also submitted representation(s) before the Examination Controller, BSEB on 06.01.2026 and 07.01.2026 respectively, the copies of which have been marked as Annexure-P/6 to the instant writ petition, however, till date the respondent authorities are

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.2150 of 2026(2) dt.10-02-2026 3/3

¶27

sitting tight over the matter.

¶28

Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, learned Advocate for the

¶29

BSEB fairly submits that in identical writ petitions, the petitioners were extended liberty to file fresh representation before the Examination Controller, BSEB, who is the competent authority to look into the matter and take appropriate decision.

¶30

Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the aforesaid facts that the objection of the petitioners have not been considered and brought to its logical conclusion, this Court deems it fit and proper to extend liberty to the petitioners to file fresh representation bringing on record the necessary facts before the respondent no.5 (Examination Controller, BSEB), preferably within a period of two weeks from today.

¶31

In case, such a representation is filed, the concerned respondent shall pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with the objection raised by the petitioners within a further period of four weeks.

¶32

The writ petition stands disposed off.

¶33

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶34

rohit/-

¶35

Maya Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maya Kumari 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

Kumari Babli Vs The State of Bihar

Kaushal Kumar Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Arvind Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Runa Devi, Vs The State of Bihar

Mithila Teachers Training College Vs The State of Bihar

Brajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar