SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 2944

PATNA HIGH COURT
Harish Kumar, J
Ajay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18977 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anant Prasad Singh, SC-15, Mr. Ankit Katriar, Adv., Mr. Rishi Sinha, Adv.

The Bihar School Examination Board must consider the school recognition application to ensure fair remuneration for educators.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The petitioners sought recognition of their school by the Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB) as per applicable educational statutes. Facts of the Case: Petitioners, working as a teacher and clerk at a school, claimed unpaid salaries due to lack of recognition and government aid.

Findings of Court:
The court disposed off the writ petition directing the BSEB to consider the petitioners’ representation in a timely manner.

Issues: The court framed the main question as whether the BSEB would recognize the school and grant necessary funds.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the petitioners' rights to remuneration necessitated a review by the BSEB of the submitted inspection report.

Result: The court directed the respondent to take appropriate action within eight weeks.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

2 31-01-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioners who are claiming to be teacher and peon of Rajendra Pratap Singh Mangal Prasad High School, Shreepur, Kaivaya, have approached this Court seeking a direction upon the respondent, Bihar School Examination Board (in short, BSEB) to complete the inspection and recognize the school and further recommended to the State Government for extending necessary government aid to the petitioners’ school so that the petitioners along with others can get necessary remuneration/salary.

3. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that the inspection of the school was conducted and the report has also been submitted before the concerned authorities, including the Director (Academy), BSEB, Patna, with a request to grant recognition and release the government aid/fund, but till date the same has not been done. For redressal of the grievance, the school has also approached before the concerned authorities, but till date no decision has been taken. In absence of the necessary fund, the petitioners along with others have been deprived from their remuneration.

4. Considering the limited grievance of the petitioners, this Court instead of directing the concerned respondents to seek instruction(s) and file counter affidavit, deems it fit and proper to dispose off the writ petition with a direction to the respondent no.3 to consider the representation of the petitioners as placed at Annexure-P-8 dated 06.01.2025 and take appropriate decision in accordance with law, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

5. The writ petition stands disposed off.

(Harish Kumar, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top