IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.191 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17382 of 2024 ======================================================

Prof. (Dr.) Shyam Sundar Gupta ... ... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar & Ors.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, Sr. Adv.

Md. Tauseef Waquar, Adv.

Mr. Akshat Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Randhiar Kumar No.1, Adv.

Mr. Pranav Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.D. Yadav, AAG-9 For the Resp No.10 : Mr. Amit Shrivastava, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Girish Pandey, Adv.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

8 18-02-2026 This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the appellant challenging the order dated 15.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.17382 of 2024.

2. The aforesaid writ petition has been filed by the writ-petitioner for quashing of the order dated 25.10.2024 issued under the signature of Additional Chief Secretary, Health Department, wherein it was decided that the seniority of the private respondent no.10 to the writ petition will be decided as specified in the merit list prepared by the Bihar Public Service Commission at the time of appointment to the post of Ayurvedic Medical Officer, inter alia, with others prayers.

3. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has been pleased to hold in para-15 that since the order dated 25.10.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Secretary was based on the judgment passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court dated 11.09.2015 in LPA No.759 of 2012 and another analogus case, wherein the issue of inter se seniority has already been settled. Therefore, the writ petition was found to be devoid of merit.

4. The main ground that has been taken by the appellant in challenging such order is that while passing such order, the learned Single Judge has not considered Clause 6 of the Notification dated 27.11.2004 which clearly stipulates that for the purpose of determining inter se seniority under teaching cadre, the date of joining/taking over the charge on the post of Lecturer would be the determinative factor. The said Notification was also not considered in the judgment and order dated 23.06.2015.

5. The learned senior counsel for the appellant placed Annexure-3 to the writ petition as well as Annexure-P/1 appended to I.A. No.1 of 2025. However, during the course of hearing, certain anomalies were noticed in the said documents.

In view of the aforesaid facts, the learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that in order to clarify the position he would furnish an English translation of both the documents; and prayed that the matter be listed in the next week.

6. As prayed for, put up this matter on 26.02.2026.

(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)

( Harish Kumar, J)

rohit/-

U