The Patna High Court affirms that in the absence of statutory guidelines or regulations, disputes relating to service conditions governed by private managing committees of affiliated colleges are not amenable to writ jurisdiction, reiterating the binding authority of its earlier Division Bench decision; thus upholding existing precedent and reinforcing the limitation on writ remedies in similar educational sector disputes.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CWJC/12243/2017 of Ramvichar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors |
| CNR | BRHC010080992017 |
| Date of Registration | 23-08-2017 |
| Decision Date | 30-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA |
| Court | Patna High Court |
| Precedent Value | Binding within the jurisdiction of Patna High Court |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms Smt. Radha Kumari Singh vs. The Governing Body of Mahanth Mahadevanand Mahila Mahavidyalaya, 1977 PLJR 110 (Division Bench) |
| Type of Law | Service Law / Education Law / Writ Jurisdiction |
| Questions of Law | Whether writ jurisdiction can be invoked in service matters against private managing committees of affiliated colleges in the absence of governing statutory guidelines? |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that affairs of a private managing committee of an affiliated college cannot be agitated in writ jurisdiction in the absence of relevant statutory guidelines or regulations. The Division Bench decision in Smt. Radha Kumari Singh continues to govern the field. The liberty to approach the Bihar School Examination Board depends upon the existence of relevant guidelines, which were absent at the material time. Therefore, the writ petition was not maintainable, and the appropriate remedy was to approach a civil court or the relevant authority if guidelines exist. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | Smt. Radha Kumari Singh vs. The Governing Body of Mahanth Mahadevanand Mahila Mahavidyalaya, 1977 PLJR 110 |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | The Court relied upon the binding authority of the Division Bench decision in Smt. Radha Kumari Singh, which bars writ jurisdiction in service disputes pertaining to private management of affiliated colleges, unless statutory rules apply. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The petitioner challenged actions relating to his service as a Class IV employee under the managing committee of a private affiliated college. In prior litigation (CWJC No. 20495 of 2012), the writ was dismissed as not maintainable under the 1977 PLJR 110 precedent. An LPA confirmed the dismissal, granting liberty to approach civil court or the School Examination Board if guidelines existed. The Board clarified that no such guidelines existed in 2012; guidelines were only framed later in 2019. The petitioner did not explain the delayed representation made only in 2017. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of Patna High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts when dealing with similar issues where no statutory guidelines exist |
| Follows | Smt. Radha Kumari Singh vs. The Governing Body of Mahanth Mahadevanand Mahila Mahavidyalaya, 1977 PLJR 110 (Division Bench) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms that in the absence of statutory rules or guidelines, writ jurisdiction is unavailable for service disputes with private managing committees of affiliated colleges.
- Clarifies that liberty to approach statutory authorities (like the Bihar School Examination Board) is conditioned on the existence of promulgated guidelines applicable at the relevant time.
- Confirms that the Division Bench precedent of 1977 continues to bar maintainability of such writs, even where new guidelines are subsequently framed.
- Delay in filing representations to authorities without proper explanation can further bar consideration by the court.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court examined the maintainability of a writ petition involving a service dispute against a private managing committee of an affiliated college and relied chiefly on the Division Bench decision in Smt. Radha Kumari Singh, 1977 PLJR 110.
- It was noted that the legal position established by this precedent remains governing: writ jurisdiction is not available for affairs of private managing committees unless there exist relevant statutory regulations.
- The earlier LPA and single judge decisions in respect of the petitioner had also held similarly, only allowing for recourse to the Bihar School Examination Board if guidelines existed.
- The Board’s affidavit in the present case clarified that such guidelines were only framed in 2019, and none existed at the relevant time when the cause arose or when liberty was granted.
- The Court also noted that the petitioner failed to approach the civil court as permitted and offered no explanation for the delay in approaching the Board.
- Consequently, the writ was dismissed as not maintainable, reiterating the limitation on writ remedies in such circumstances.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Sought relief for grievances in service conditions/actions taken by the managing committee of an affiliated college.
- Invoked the liberty previously granted by the Division Bench to approach the School Examination Board.
Bihar School Examination Board / Respondents
- Asserted in affidavit (para 11) that no guidelines or rules existed in 2012 regarding service conditions of employees of private affiliated colleges.
- Stated that relevant guidelines were framed only in 2019; at all material times in dispute, no such framework existed.
- Managing committee/governing body, not the Board, was competent to decide service matters under the new guidelines.
Factual Background
The petitioner, a Class IV employee at a privately managed affiliated college, challenged certain actions of the college’s managing committee. A previous writ petition filed by him was dismissed, relying on established precedent regarding the non-maintainability of such matters in writ jurisdiction. The petitioner’s Letters Patent Appeal was also dismissed, with liberty granted to approach either the civil court or the Bihar School Examination Board, contingent upon the existence of governing guidelines. The Board later confirmed that no such guidelines existed at the relevant time; guidelines were framed only in 2019. The petitioner filed a delayed representation before the Board without justification for the delay.
Statutory Analysis
- The Court considered whether any statutory guidelines or regulations governed the service conditions of employees at private affiliated colleges.
- The affidavit of the Bihar School Examination Board clarified that no such regulations existed in 2012 when the dispute arose, with relevant guidelines first being introduced in 2019.
- The Court interpreted the scope of writ jurisdiction, reaffirming its limitation in the absence of a statutory framework.
- The decision of the Division Bench in 1977 PLJR 110 was cited as binding authority on this statutory interpretation.
Procedural Innovations
None reported in the judgment; standard procedures followed regarding maintainability and affidavit evidence.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The Patna High Court reaffirmed the existing legal position as laid down in Smt. Radha Kumari Singh, 1977 PLJR 110. No new law was created; established precedent was followed.