Umesh Prasad Singh vs The State of Bihar — CWJC/8963/2025

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 16-Jun-2025

CNR: BRHC010501122025

e-Filing Number

13-05-2025

Filing Number

CWJC/12231/2025

Filing Date

14-May-2025

Registration No

CWJC/8963/2025

Registration Date

23-May-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman

Coram

Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CIVIL WRIT ( 15 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS, NON GAZETTED SER. ( 5402 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Umesh Prasad Singh

    Adv. Mohammad Akhter Hussain,Tahsin Nayyar Siddiqui,Tahsin Nayyar Siddiqui, ,Tahsin Nayyar Siddiqui

  2. 2.Ashraf Imam,

  3. 3.Shamsh Alam Ansari

  4. 4.Md. Farooque Azam,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Bihar

    Adv. ,Arvind Kumar,Rana Vikram Singh 1123

  2. 2.The Secretary Personnel and Administration Reforms Department,

  3. 3.The Commissioner, Purnea Division,

  4. 4.The District Magistrate,

  5. 5.The Deputy Development Commissioner,

  6. 6.The Establishment Deputy Collector,

  7. 7.The District Welfare Officer,

  8. 8.The Additional Collector,

  9. 9.Sadanand Sharma, Head Cleark, Establishment,

  10. 10.Director General Vigilance Investigation Beaure

  11. 11.Principal Secretary Vigilance Department

  12. 12.Shambhu Kamti,

  13. 13.Rajesh Paswan,

  14. 14.Binod Kumar Kamti

  15. 15.Mahesh Prasad Thakur

  16. 16.Kumari Meera Karn

  17. 17.Ganesh Prasas Sah

  18. 18.Md. Tarique Hussain

  19. 19.Shrawan Kumar Bantar

  20. 20.Mahfooz Alam

  21. 21.Prem Kumar Singh

  22. 22.Lovindra Prasad Thakur @ Lobindra Prasad Thakur

  23. 23.Devendra Chauhan

  24. 24.Bhonu Das

  25. 25.Deo Narayan Ram

  26. 26.Babita Kumari

  27. 27.Santosh Kumar Thakur

  28. 28.Satyendra Kumar Singh

  29. 29.Raj Kishore Thakur

  30. 30.Ganesh Mandal

  31. 31.Pankaj Kumar Ram

  32. 32.Anjana Kumari Saha

  33. 33.Lakshmi Devi @ Laxmi Devi

  34. 34.Manoj Kumar

  35. 35.Dharmendra Kumar

  36. 36.Md. Zubair Alam

  37. 37.Lovely Das @ Lavil Das

  38. 38.Rasik Lal Marandi

  39. 39.Sunil Kumar

  40. 40.Kumari Kaushalya

  41. 41.Ramesh Kumar Ram

  42. 42.Shatrughan Thakur

  43. 43.Kumari Sushila

  44. 44.Rajesh Prasad Paswan

  45. 45.Mina Devi

  46. 46.Jyoti Kumari

  47. 47.Rakhi Goswami

  48. 48.Chhabi Das

  49. 49.Pravin Kumar Thakur

  50. 50.Umesh Prasad Saha

  51. 51.Dilip Kumar Goswami

  52. 52.Ramesh Prasad Rai

  53. 53.Md. Tanveer Alam

  54. 54.Md. Quasim,

  55. 55.Shatrughan Thakur

  56. 56.Ram Narayan Ram

  57. 57.Shailendra Kumar Singh

  58. 58.Barnabas Marandi

  59. 59.Ranvijay Kumar,

  60. 60.Sunil Kumar Hembrum

  61. 61.Lakshman Kumar Roy

  62. 62.Shree Lal Baitha

  63. 63.Gopi Das

  64. 64.Shivchandra Ram

  65. 65.Saroj Kumar Yadav

  66. 66.Md. Alam

  67. 67.Kumari Kiran Kerketta

  68. 68.Bhawesh Kumar Singh

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Dr. AnshumanView PDF

    Case Summary: CWJC No. 8963/2025 The Patna High Court disposed of petitioners' writ petition seeking Class-IV employment appointments under Advertisement No. 02/1999, finding that the Vigilance Investigation Bureau discovered large-scale irregularities including overwriting and mark sheet manipulation in the examination, resulting in FIR No. 52 of 2019. The court directed petitioners to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate within 30 days but held that no relief could be granted regarding the compromised 1999 advertisement due to vigilance adverse remarks and pending criminal investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Jun-2025

    For Admission - Fresh Cases

  4. 14-May-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWJC/8963/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWJC No. 8963/2025 The Patna High Court disposed of petitioners' writ petition seeking Class-IV employment appointments under Advertisement No. 02/1999, finding that the Vigilance Investigation Bureau discovered large-scale irregularities including overwriting and mark sheet manipulation in the examination, resulting in FIR No. 52 of 2019. The court directed petitioners to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate within 30 days but held that no relief could be granted regarding the compromised 1999 advertisement due to vigilance adverse remarks and pending criminal investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case