A contempt plea has been filed before the Supreme Court alleging wilful disobedience of its February 12, 2014 judgment in Renu v. District & Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari & Anr. in relation to recruitment of staff in the subordinate judiciary.

The plea filed through Advocate Arjun Garg challenges the Patna High Court Officers and Staff (Recruitment, Appointment, Promotion and other Conditions of Service and Conduct) (14th Amendment) Rules, 2026, notified on August 13, 2026. According to the petitioner, the amendment raises from 25% to 40% the quota of Regular Mazdoor (Group-C) posts that may be filled through selection/recommendation by the Chief Justice/Judges under the Patna High Court Judges’ Domestic Help (Modified) Scheme, 2025.

The petitioner contends that the amended framework does not provide for public advertisement or competitive selection, contrary to the principles laid down in Renu concerning transparency, equal opportunity and Articles 14 and 16.

The plea also alleges a disparity between direct recruitment and the recommendation route, with candidates under direct recruitment being subjected to prescribed tests and other requirements, while the recommendation quota allegedly does not involve the same competitive process.

The petitioner has further challenged the Patna High Court Judges’ Domestic Help (Modified) Scheme, 2025, alleging that it permits engagement of domestic/personal helps without public recruitment and their subsequent absorption against Regular Mazdoor posts.

The contempt plea seeks proceedings against the Secretary-cum-Legal Remembrancer, Government of Bihar, and the Registrar General of the Patna High Court for alleged wilful disobedience of the 2014 judgment.