Md. Sultan Ahmad vs The State Of Bihar
2026 Latest Caselaw 605 Patna

Patna High Court

Md. Sultan Ahmad vs The State Of Bihar on 24 February, 2026

Author: Harish Kumar

Bench: Harish Kumar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9443 of 2025
     ======================================================
     Md. Sultan Ahmad, Son of Late Md. Alauddin, Resident of village- Rajpur,
     P.S. Kishanpur, District- Supaul.
                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                        Versus
1.    The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna
2.   The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
3.   The Special Director, Secondary Education, Education Department,
     Government of Bihar, Patna
4.   The Joint Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
5.   The District Education Officer, Supaul District Supaul.
6.   The District Program Officer (Establishment) Supaul, District- Supaul.
7.   The District Program Officer (Secondary Education), Supaul, District-
     Supaul.
8.   The Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna Through Secretary Apex
     Tower, Harron Nagar Colony Sector-2, P.S.- Phulwari Sharif, Patna
9.   The Secretary, Madarsa Education Board, Patna, Through Secretary, Apex
     Tower, Harron Nagar Colony Sector-2, P.S.- Phulwari Sharif, Patna
10. The Secretary, Madarsa Hanifa Majeedia Rajpur, Supaul, Madar No 250.
11. The Head Maulvi Madarsa Hanifa Majidia Rajpur, District- Supaul
                                                          ... ... Respondent/s
    ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s  :         Mr. Md. Musowir, Advocate
     For the State         :         Mr. Mr. P. K. Shahi, Advocate General
     For the Madarsa Board :         Md. Aslam Ansari, Advocate
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
             and
             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
     ORAL JUDGMENT
     (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

      Date : 24-02-2026

                     This Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case has been filed by

      the petitioner Md. Sultan Ahmad seeking for following reliefs:-

                                     "That, by this writ petition, the
                               petitioner would like to challenge the validity
                               of Rule-6 issued under the signature of the
                               Respondents no. 4 and contained in his
 Patna High Court CWJC No.9443 of 2025 dt.24-02-2026
                                           2/3




                                 Resolution no. 970 dated 31.8.2013 and
                                 declare its ultra- virus, whereby and where
                                 under the instruction has been issued that the
                                 contribution will be paid on the basis of
                                 calculation of fixed salary to those teachers in
                                 place of regular pay-scale, who are appointed
                                 against the vacancy on or after 15.2.2011 by
                                 the State Government.
                                        Alternatively      to   declare   that   the
                                 Resolution no. 970 dated 31.08.2013 could
                                 not take its retrospective effect i.e. with effect
                                 from 15.2.2011 for debarring the appointee
                                 against the vacancy on or after 15.2.2011
                                 though the impugned Resolution itself is
                                 effective from 01.04.2013 according to the
                                 Respondents themselves.
                                        The petitioner would further like to
                                 pray before this Hon'ble Court that a writ of
                                 MANDAMUS             be   issued    against     the
                                 Respondents."


                         2. During course of argument, learned counsel for

         the petitioner submits that similarly situated persons approached

         this Court in CWJC No. 985 of 2015 so also in CWJC No. 4517

         of 2021 and their cases were disposed of vide order dated

         27.03.2019

and 25.04.2023 respectively, they have got the

necessary reliefs and in view of such order passed in the

identical matters, the petitioner is entitled to get the relief.

3. When we posed a pertinent question to the Patna High Court CWJC No.9443 of 2025 dt.24-02-2026

learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether any

representation has been made by the petitioner before the

concerned authority for ventilating his grievance basing on the

orders passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petitions, the

answer was in negative.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however,

submits that the liberty may be granted to the petitioner to

approach the concerned authority by filing representation and

also annexing the copies of the orders passed in the aforesaid

two writ petitions.

5. In view of such submission, the writ petition is

disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the

concerned authority for ventilating his grievance.

6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed

any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner.

(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)

(Harish Kumar, J) uday/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          25.02.2026
Transmission Date       NA