Disposed¶26

Sunita Jaiswal v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 May 2026CWJC/9030/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sunita Jaiswal v. State of Bihar & others; Patna High Court; Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9030 of 2025; decided 05-05-2026 by Dr. Anshuman, J. Writ petition seeking monetary benefit for intervening period from date of removal (31.8.2012) to date of reinstatement (27.1.2024). State's preliminary objection: mandamus sought without prior representation. Petition disposed of with direction to file representation before District Programme Officer, Supaul (respondent No. 7), to be decided within 90 days. No statute or precedent cited; no costs or quantum awarded in this order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to first file a representation before the District Programme Officer, Supaul (respondent No. 7); respondent No. 7 directed to decide the representation within 90 days of receipt. ¶26

Sunita Jaiswal Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9030 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Sunita Jaiswal Wife of Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kumar Choudhari, Resident of Chauhatta, Ward No. 8, P.S.-Kishanpur, Block-Kishanpur, District-Supaul.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The Deputy Director, Welfare Department, Kosi Division, Saharsa.

¶10

The Collector cum District Magistrate, Supaul.

¶11

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Supaul.

¶12

The District Programme Officer, Supaul.

¶13

The Block Development Project Officer, Kishanpur, District-Supaul.

¶14

The Child Development Project Officer, Kishanpur, District-Supaul.

¶15

... ... Respondent/s

¶16

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

¶17

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (24) ======================================================

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶19

2 05-05-2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶20

counsel for the State are present.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

¶22

i) For the issuance of an appropriate Writ/Direction to the respondents to pay the monetary benefit of petitioner during the intervening period from 31.8.2012 the date of removal to the date of reinstatement i.e. 27.1.2024.

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.9030 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2026 2/2

¶24

(ii) For the issuance of any other relief or reliefs as your Lordships may deem fit and proper.

¶25

Learned counsel for the State raises a preliminary objection and submits that a writ of mandamus has been sought, but no representation has been made.

¶26

In this view of the matter, the present writ petition stands disposed of, directing the petitioner to first file a representation before the District Programme Officer, Supaul (respondent No. 7). Upon receipt of the same, respondent No. 7 is hereby directed to take a decision on the petitioner’s representation within 90 days thereafter.

¶27

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

¶28

Aman Kumar/-

¶29

Sunita Jaiswal v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunita Jaiswal 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

Umesh Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rubi Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Roshan Vs The State of Bihar

Draupadi Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Kumar Abhishek Vs The State of Bihar

Lakshmi Devi Vs The State of Bihar