[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Sandhya Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 23 February, 2026
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8970 of 2024
======================================================
Sandhya Kumari Wife of Sri Awadhesh Kumar Gupta, Permanent resident of
Village and Post - Belari, P.S.- Shambhuganj, District - Banka, presently
residing at Salouna, Post and P.S.- Bakhari, District - Begusarai, the then
Panchayat Rojgar Sewak, Gram Panchayat Mauzi Harisingh, Block -
Garhpura, District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Development
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Commissioner, MANREGA-cum-CEO, Bihar Rural Development
Society (BRDS), Red Cross Building, Gandhi Maidan, Patna.
4. The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
cum Reviewing Authority.
5. The District Programme Coordinator-cum-Appellate Authority-cum-District
Magistrate, District - Begusarai.
6. The Additional District Programme Coordinator-cum-Deputy Development
Commissioner, District - Begusarai.
7. Bindu Kumari, the then Programme Officer (MNAREGA), Block -
Garhpura, District - Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Avanindra Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Ram Naresh Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sudama Kumar (AC to SC-12)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 23-02-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with the
following relief/s:-
"I. To hold and declare that, the orders
impugned as contained in Memo No. 190
dated 28.03.2022, by the Respondent no.6,
Patna High Court CWJC No.8970 of 2024 dt.23-02-2026
2/9
(Ann-6) whereby and where under the
Petitioner's services as Panchayat Rojgar
Sewak, has been terminated, and the order
dated 21.06.2023 by appellate authority
(Ann-P 8) as well as of order of Reviewing
authority dated 05.12.2023 (Ann-P10),
whereby and where under termination has
been upheld, are violative of Principle of
Natural Justice, and as such, bad in law &
on facts and as such fit to be set aside, by
this Hon'ble Court.
AND CONSEQUENT UPON SUCH
DECLARATION
II. For issuance of appropriate orders,
direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari
for quashing the orders impugned as
contained in Memo No. 190 dated
28.03.2022
, by the Respondent No.6, (Ann-
6), and the order dated 21.06.2023 by
appellate authority (Ann-P 8} as well as of
order of Reviewing authority dated
05.12.2023 (Ann - P 10).
III. For issuance of appropriate orders,
direction or writ in the nature of Mandamus
for directing the respondents concerned to
reinstate the Petitioner in the service as
Panchayat Rojgar Sewak, Gram Panchayat
Mauzi Harisingh, Block Garhpura,
forthwith, with all consequential benefits,
including the salary for the period, for
Patna High Court CWJC No.8970 of 2024 dt.23-02-2026
which the petitioner has been kept out of
service, without any fault on her part.
IV. For issuance of appropriate orders,
direction or writ in the nature of Mandamus
for directing the respondents concerned to
make payment of current as well as arrears
Salary, along with penal interest, at least at
the rate of 18%.
V. For grant of any other relief or relief's to
which the Petitioners may be found entitled
to, in the facts and circumstances of this
case."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner was posted Panchayat Rojgar Sewika, Gram
Panchayat Mauzi Harisingh, Block- Garhpura, District-
Begusarai. During her work period, she came in conflict with the
respondent no.7 who was posted as Programme Officer
(MNREGA), Block- Garhpura, District- Begusarai. Counsel
submits that the dispute between the petitioner and the
respondent no.7 has arisen on 07.07.2010. Subsequently, the
alleged dispute occurred between the petitioner and the
respondent no.7 resulted into a criminal case lodged against the
petitioner bearing Garhpura P.S. Case No. 25 of 2022 dated
11.03.2022 in which, the petitioner went into custody and
remained in custody till 14.07.2022, when she was granted bail
by this Hon'ble Court. Counsel further submits that the services
Patna High Court CWJC No.8970 of 2024 dt.23-02-2026
of the petitioner has been guided by Letter No. 196 dated
25.03.2022 (Annexure-P/11) issued by the Bihar Rural
Development Society (BRDS), Government of Bihar, framed for
Bihar Rural Development Society, under which, the provision of
conduction of departmental proceeding has been indicated in
Clause-3 of the said letter. According to which, for departmental
proceeding, show cause has to be issued and upon receiving the
show cause following the principles of natural justice, order of
punishment has to be imposed. Counsel submits that there is a
provision of appeal before the Appellate Authority as well as
provision of revision before the Revisional/Reviewing Authority.
Counsel submits that the petitioner went into custody on
12.03.2022 and thereafter, granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court on 14.07.2022.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the original order has been passed vide order dated
28.03.2022 contained in Memo No. 190 (Annexure-P/6); the
appellate order has been passed vide order dated 21.06.2023,
contained in Memo No. 2232 dated 10.07.2023 (Annexure-P/8)
and the revisional order has been passed vide order dated
05.12.2023 (Annexure-P/10). Counsel submits that all the orders
have been passed in gross violation of principles of natural
justice. The show cause has not been served upon the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.8970 of 2024 dt.23-02-2026
as a result of which, the petitioner could not defend herself.
Counsel, therefore, submits that the Original Authority,
Appellate Authority and the Reviewing Authority, all have
passed orders in gross violation of Letter No. 196 dated
25.03.2022 (Annexure-P/11) and the same be directed to be set
aside.
5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that the show cause has been served upon the husband
of the petitioner, and therefore, it is wrong to say that the notice
has not been issued. He further submits that the original order,
appellate order as well as the revisional order (Annexure-P/6,
P/8 & P/10), all were passed after due consideration of all the
points raised by the petitioner. Counsel submits that it is wrongly
alleged that the violation of principles of natural justice has been
made. He, therefore, submits that there is no need of any
interference in this matter and this writ petition be dismissed.
6. After hearing the parties and upon perusal of the
documents, it transpires to this Court that admittedly, the
petitioner was serving as Panchayat Rojgar Sewika and the
services of the Panchayat Rojgar Sewika comes within the
purview of the Rural Development Department, Government of
Bihar and it has been indicated in Letter No. 196 dated
25.03.2022 that those persons who are working under Bihar
Patna High Court CWJC No.8970 of 2024 dt.23-02-2026
Rural Development Society (BRDS) including the Panchayat
Rojgar Sewak/Sewika for whom, the departmental proceeding
has to be done according to the said letter.
7. Therefore, it is very much relevant to quote the
Letter No. 196 dated 25.03.2022 (Annexure-P/11), and the
extract of same is as follows:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.8970 of 2024 dt.23-02-2026
8. Upon the specific query of the Court from the
learned counsel for the State that whether the show cause was
served upon the petitioner when she was admittedly in jail from
12.03.2022 to 14.07.2022 or not, counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.8970 of 2024 dt.23-02-2026
submits that about service of explanation, there is no pleading.
9. It also transpires to this Court that the petitioner
was granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on
14.07.2022, meaning thereby, the petitioner was in custody from
12.03.2022 to 14.07.2022 atleast, and the original order i.e. order
dated 28.03.2022 contained in Memo No. 190 (Annexure-P/6)
was passed when the petitioner was in custody. Whereas, the
appellate order and the revisional order, both were passed in the
year 2023 i.e. after the petitioner got bail by the Hon'ble Court.
It transpires to this Court that in the said rule, the original order
has to be passed by the Disciplinary Authority only after taking
the explanation. But, here in the present case, it transpires to this
Court that admittedly, the show cause has not been served upon
the petitioner in jail, nor there is a single document by which it
transpires that the show cause has been served upon the
petitioner or any reply has come from the jail.
10. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that the
original order has been passed in gross violation of the rule
framed by the State itself, mentioned above. Hence, the original
order dated 28.03.2022 contained in Memo No. 190 (Annexure-
P/6) is hereby set aside. Since, the original order is quashed,
therefore, automatically the subsequent orders i.e. the appellate
order dated 21.06.2023, contained in Memo No. 2232 dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.8970 of 2024 dt.23-02-2026
10.07.2023 (Annexure-P/8) as well as the revisional order dated
05.12.2023 (Annexure-P/10) are also hereby set aside.
11. Liberty is hereby granted to the Disciplinary
Authority to take a fresh decision after granting show cause to
the petitioner and then pass order in accordance with the rule
mentioned above, within 60 days from the date of production of
a copy of this order.
12. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observation, this
writ petition stands allowed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 25/02/2026
Transmission Date NA
