Khushbu Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Mar 2026CWJC/3157/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anganbadi Sevika selection; Advertisement No. 01/2022; Ward No. 7, Anganbadi Center No. 108; CDPO Manpur, Gaya; ICDS Bihar; provisional merit list; mandamus for selection letter; result kept in abeyance; interpolation in mark-sheet; verification from Board/Institution; representation before District Magistrate, Gaya; 30 days to file representation; 90 days to decide; writ petition disposed with directions; Patna High Court; Dr. Anshuman, J.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions: petitioner to file a fresh representation with a copy of the order within 30 days before the District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent No. 4), who shall verify the mark-sheet from the concerned Board/Institution and take a decision on the representation in accordance with law within 90 days thereafter. ¶¶29

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether a mandamus should be issued commanding the concerned authority to provide the selection letter to the petitioner, who claims to be at the top of the provisional merit list for the post of Anganbadi Sevika. +1 more

¶¶20

Court's answer

The petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation along with a copy of this order within 30 days before the District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent No. 4), and upon receipt the respondent No. 4 is directed to take a decision on the representation within 90 days thereafter.

¶¶28

Ratio / Principle

The District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent No. 4) shall verify the mark-sheet from the concerned Board/Institution and then take a decision in accordance with law within the stipulated period.

¶¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil writ jurisdiction (CWJC No.3157 of 2026, Patna High Court, Dr. Anshuman, J., decided 09-03-2026) — Selection to the post of Anganbadi Sevika, Ward No. 7, Anganbadi Center No. 108, under CDPO, Manpur, Gaya, pursuant to Advertisement No. 01/2022 — Petitioner, claiming top position in the provisional merit list, sought a mandamus for issuance of the selection letter — Final list not published; result kept in abeyance as the CDPO's letter indicated apparent interpolation in the mark-sheet — Petitioner had represented to the CDPO and the District Magistrate, Gaya, requesting verification of any overwriting from the concerned officials/Board — Held: petitioner to file a fresh representation with a copy of the order within 30 days before the District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent No. 4); respondent No. 4 to verify the mark-sheet from the concerned Board/Institution and take a decision in accordance with law within 90 days of receipt — Writ petition disposed of accordingly.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3157 of 2026

¶2

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

¶3

Khushbu Kumari wife of Manish Kumar, Resident of Village-Bhediya Kala, P.S.-Buniyadganj, Dist-Gaya.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, social welwafre Department, Patna-1.

¶7

The Managing Director ICDS Bihar, Patna.1.

¶8

The Commissioner Magadh Division, Gaya.

¶9

The Distric Magistrate, Gaya.

¶10

The District Programme Officer, Gaya.

¶11

The Child Development programme officer Maanpur, Gaya.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Sushmita Sharma, AC to SC-9 ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶15

2 09-03-2026

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶17

counsel for the State.

¶18

The present writ petition has been filed for the

¶19

following relief/s:-

¶20

(i) A mandamus commanding direction to concerned authority to provide selection letter to selected applicant Khushbu Kumari who is in the top of provisional merit list.

¶21

(ii) For issuance of any other writ, writs, order, orders to which the petitioner may found entitled too.

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.3157 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026 2/3

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has applied for selection to the post of Anganbadi Sevika in the prescribed format for her selection in Ward No. 7, Anganbadi Center No. 108, which comes within the purview of CDPO, Manpur, Gaya. He further submits that the said application was made in light of Advertisement No. 01/2022, but the final list has not been published and the result has been kept in abeyance. He further submits that, in this regard, she has filed a representation before the concerned CDPO, but the final result has not been published. He further submits that the petitioner has filed a representation in which she has categorically demanded that the selection be made in her favour, whereas the concerned officials have taken a decision that, until and unless the proper verification shall not be made, process of selection shall not be completed. He further submits that in the petitioner’s representation, it has been requested that verification may be made from the concerned officials/Board.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the letter of the CDPO indicates that there appears to be interpolation in the mark-sheet and it is due to this reason, the selection has not been completed.

¶25

Upon hearing the parties, it transpires to this Court

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.3157 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026 3/3

¶27

that the petitioner has not only requested the concerned CDPO but also the District Magistrate, Gaya, and in her representation a categorical request has been made that if, there is any overwriting in the mark-sheet, then verification may be made from the concerned officials/Board.

¶28

In light of the submissions made, it is hereby directed to the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with a copy of this order within 30 days from today before the District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent No. 4). Upon receipt of the same, the respondent No. 4 is directed to take a decision on the petitioner’s representation within 90 days thereafter. It is made clear that the District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent No. 4) shall verify about the mark-sheet from the concerned Board/Institution and then take a decision in accordance with law within the above stipulated period.

¶29

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

¶30

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

¶31

Aman Kumar/-

¶32

Khushbu Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khushbu 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

Ajoy Kumar Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar

Nilam Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Niraj Jha @ Rishi Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Mintu Kumar Nirala Vs The State of Bihar

Pooja Kumari Vs The State Bank of India

Kanchan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar