Rakesh Roshan vs The State of Bihar — CWJC/6801/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 04th May 2026.
CNR: BRHC010371332026
e-Filing Number
07-04-2026
Filing Number
CWJC/8197/2026
Filing Date
08-Apr-2026
Registration No
CWJC/6801/2026
Registration Date
30-Apr-2026
Judge
Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman
Coram
Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CIVIL WRIT ( 15 )
Sub-Category
RGL.AD-HOC., NON GAZETTED SER. ( 5002 )
Judicial Branch
Judicial Section
Decision Date
04-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Rakesh Roshan
Adv. AMIT PANDEY,Kumar Brijnandan,Kumar Brijnandan, ,Raj Kumar,Kumar Brijnandan
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of Bihar
Adv. ,ANUKRITI JAIPURIYAR 1123
-
2.The Secretary,
-
3.The Chairman,
-
4.The Managing Director,
-
5.The General Manager,
-
6.The Deputy General Manager (Finance and Accounts),
-
7.The Manager (Administration),
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-May-2026
Mr. Justice Dr. AnshumanView PDF
Case Summary: CWJC No. 6801/2026 Rakesh Roshan v. State of Bihar & Others Rakesh Roshan, with 21+ years of continuous service with Bihar State Tourism Development Corporation (BSTDC), sought regularization, service continuity, equal pay, and parity with similarly situated employees. The Patna High Court declined immediate relief, finding petitioner's prayer lacked proper pleading regarding parity claims and instead directed petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Managing Director within 30 days, with the respondent required to decide within 90 days with reasoned orders. The petition was disposed accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
01-May-2026
For Admission - Fresh Cases
-
08-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CWJC/6801/2026
Case Summary: CWJC No. 6801/2026 Rakesh Roshan v. State of Bihar & Others Rakesh Roshan, with 21+ years of continuous service with Bihar State Tourism Development Corporation (BSTDC), sought regularization, service continuity, equal pay, and parity with similarly situated employees. The Patna High Court declined immediate relief, finding petitioner's prayer lacked proper pleading regarding parity claims and instead directed petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Managing Director within 30 days, with the respondent required to decide within 90 days with reasoned orders. The petition was disposed accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts