KUmari Sandhya @ Sandhya Devi Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7362 of 2026

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

KUmari Sandhya @ Sandhya Devi Wife of Bindresh Prasad @ Vindesh Prasad, Resident of Village - Pipra, P.O. Bajudih, Mahuawan, Police Station - Vijaipur, District- Goaplganj.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar Through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education (Primary), Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department of Education (Primary), Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The District Education Officer, Gopalganj.

¶10

The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gopalganj.

¶11

The Block Education Officer, Vijaipur, District- Gopalganj.

¶12

The Mukhiya, Raj Belwa Gram Panchayat, Vijaipur Prakhand, DistrictGopalganj.

¶13

The Panchayat Secretary, Raj Belwa Gram Panchayat, Vijaipur Prakhand, District- Gopalganj.

¶14

Manju Bharti Wife of Parsuram Prasad, Resident of village Mitupur, P.O. Sahdigari, Police Station- Vijaipur, District- Gopalganj.

¶15

The Presiding Officer, District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, Gopalganj (Bihar).

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Lokesh Kumar Singh For the State : Mr. Government Pleader 23 Mr. Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶18

2 23-06-2026

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶20

learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State.

¶21

With the consent of the parties, this writ application

¶22

is being disposed of at this stage itself.

¶23

In the present writ application, the petitioner

¶24

has prayed for the grant of the following relief(s):-

¶25

“That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ and/or order and/ or direction commanding the respondents to reinstate the

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.7362 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026 2/3

¶27

petitioner to the post of Primary Teacher at Primary School Puraina, Vijaipur Prakhand, Gopalganj in view of the order dated 24.09.2025 passed in Appeal Case No. 21 of 2025 by the learned District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, Gopalganj, Bihar.

¶28

The petitioner further prays for direction to the learned District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, Gopalganj to dispose of the Misc. Case No. 22 of 2025 within a time frame which has been filed implementation of the order dated 24.09.2025 (issued on 09.10.2025 vide memo no. 226).”

¶29

While advancing argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if an appropriate direction is given to the learned District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, Gopalganj to dispose of the pending Misc. Case No. 22 of 2025 within a fixed time-frame, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶30

To the aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent-State, does not have any objection.

¶31

Considering the limited nature of the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ application is

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.7362 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026 3/3

¶33

disposed of, directing the District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, Gopalganj to dispose of the pending Misc. Case No. 22 of 2025, filed by the petitioner within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and all other concerned parties.

¶34

Needless to emphasize that the final order, which shall be passed by the District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, Gopalganj, should be a reasoned and speaking order. It is further clarified that if the petitioner is found entitled to the reliefs, which the petitioner has claimed in Misc.Case No. 22 of 2025, the same should be extended to the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶35

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

¶36

All pending interlocutory application(s), if any, shall also be deemed to have been disposed of.

¶37

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)

¶38

HR/-

¶39

U

KUmari Sandhya @ Sandhya Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

KUmari Sandhya @ Sandhya Devi 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

Ram Bilas Karmkar Vs The State of Bihar

Manjit Kumar @ Manjit Kumar Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Nisat Alam @ Md Nishat Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Shams Alam Ansari Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Kumar Das Vs National Institute of Open Schooling

Rupa Kumari Vs The State of Bihar