Niranjan Kumar vs The State Of Bihar & Ors.

Date : 31-08-2026 Heard Mr. Jagjit Roshan, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, learned Advocate for the State.

The petitioner is aggrieved with the part of the order dated 18.12.2025 issued under the Memo No. 1919 dated 19.12.2025 as contained in Annexure P/19 passed by the Deputy Development Commissioner cum Deputy Chairman, District Water and Sanitation Samiti, Madhepura wherein a direction has been given to the Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 to initiate fresh Selection Process of Sanitation Supervisor of Gram Panchayat -Nadhi, Murliganj, Madhepura. The prayer has also been made to stay the fresh Selection Process of Sanitation Supervisor which came to be initiated in the light of the aforesaid order dated 18.12.2025, as also the important notice issued under Letter No. 48 dated 06.01.2026 till the final adjudication of the writ petition.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner informed the Court that while the petitioner was working as Swachhatagrahi (LSBA) in Murliganj block for so many years and on being found his work satisfactory, a certificate was issued and, in the meanwhile, under the policy of Lohiya Sanitation Bihar Abhiyan, a notice for selection of Sanitation Supervisor and another post came into force. ^The petitioner, on being found eligible, applied for the post of Sanitation Supervisor. However, the process for selection which was carried out for appointment to the post of Sanitation Supervisor was marred with so many irregularities and, as such, the petitioner filed a detailed representation before the Deputy Development Commissioner, Madhepura on 15.12.2022, bringing on record all the illegalities committed by the respondents in the Selection Process. On account of such representation, the matter was inquired and finally, on being found substance in the complaint of the petitioner, the Deputy Development Commissioner, Madhepura came out with the impugned order cancelling the entire selection process and directed for fresh selection.

Notwithstanding the petitioner, being one of the successful candidate, his candidature has not been considered for selection after cancellation of selection of Respondent no. 8, albeit, to the utter surprise to the petitioner the entire selection process has been cancelled, which has caused serious prejudice to the right and entitlement of the petitioner.

Mr. Jagjit Roshan, adverting to the aforesaid facts and the averments made in the writ petition, however, fairly submitted that since the respondent authorities also came up with the important notice under Letter No. 48 dated 06.01.2026 inviting the applications for appointment to the post of Sanitation Supervisor. On being found no way out, the petitioner also applied for the said post vide Application No. 01 dated 08.01.2026.

Learned Advocate for the State, at this juncture, submitted that the petitioner has already applied in terms with the new selection process. Hence, the continuation of the present proceeding challenging the earlier order does not appear to be sustainable as the challenge of the petitioner is barred by the principle of estoppel.

This Court is also apprised by learned Advocate for the petitioner that one of the candidate namely, Ram Ratan Kumar, who has also been arrayed as Respondent No. 8 in the present matter, filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 1963 of 2026; wherein the present petitioner has also filed an intervenor application. In the aforenoted writ petition challenge has also been made to the impugned order dated 18.12.2025, similar to the present writ petition.

Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that the petitioner has already submitted his application in terms with the fresh Selection Process, the act of the challenge in the present matter, prima facie, in the opinion of this Court is barred by the principle of the estoppel and moreover, this Court also doesn't find any illegality in the order whereby a fresh selection has been ordered to be carried out, in accordance with law.

In view thereof, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

It is expected that the respondent authority shall conclude the selection process in accordance with law expeditiously.