Jharkhand High Court
Aita Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The … on 28 April, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Rajesh Kumar
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A. No. 485 of 2024
------
1. Aita Oraon, aged about 38 years, son of Somra Oraon, resident of
Railway Colony, Balidih, Quarter No. DS1/79/A, P.O. - Railway
Colony, P.S. - Balidih, Dist. - Bokaro, Jharkhand.
2. Binod Rana, aged about 44 years, son of Fagu Rana, resident of
village Udnabad, P.O. Udnabad, P.S. Giridih, District - Giridih,
Jharkhand.
3. Manoj Kumar Yadav, aged about 39 years, son of Sri jay Prakash
Yadav, resident of village Akdonikala P.O., Akdonikala, P.S. Giridih,
District Giridih, Jharkhand.
4. Uday Shankar Singh, aged about 41 years, son of Late Musafir
Singh, resident of village Baidaphari, P.O. Gadi Bharkatta, P.S.
Birni, District - Giridih, Jharkhand.
5. Pradip Kumar Paswan, aged about 41 years, son of Somar
Paswan, resident of Baburaidih, P.O. - Purri, P.S. Bengabad, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
6. Goutam Vishwakarma, aged about 36 years, son of Bimal
Vishwakarma, resident of village Lohpitti, P.O. Handadih, P.S.
Pachamba, Dist. - Giridih, Jharkhand.
7. Santosh Kumar, aged about 40 years, son of Bhikhari Saw,
resident of village Jagannathdih, P.O. Mirzaganj, P.S. Jamua, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
8. Md Quamrul Huda, aged about 34 years, son of md Suleman,
resident of village Telmakri, P.O. - Tara, P.S. Jamua, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
9. Harshit Jalan, aged about 33 years, son of Pawan Kumar Jalan,
resident of Near Tiranga Chowk, Tundi Road, Giridih P.O. & P.S.
Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
10. Tinku Kumar Das, aged about 36 years, son of Late Raju Das,
1
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
resident of Argaghat Road, Rajput Muhallua, Giridih, P.O & P.S.
Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
11. Bikash Kumar Tiwari, aged about 35 years, son of Rajendra
Prasad Tiwari, resident of village Tiwaridih, P.O. Handadih, P.S.
Pachamba, Dist. -Giridih, Jharkhand.
12. Anand Shankar, aged about 31 years, son of Vidya Nand Roy,
resident of New Barganda, P.O. New Barganda, P.S. - Giridih, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
13. Prakash Rana, aged about 35 years, son of Bhola Rana, resident of
village Golhaiya, P.O. Siyatand, P.S. Jamua, Dist. - Giridih,
Jharkhand.
14. Amit Kumar Singh, aged about 40 years, son of Chandradev Singh,
resident of village Beniadih, Near CCL Hospital, P.O. Beniadih, P.S-
Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
15. Sikendra Kumar Verma, aged about 30 years, son of Ramkrishna
Mahto, resident of village Malidih, P.O. Siyatand, P.S. Jamua, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
16. Ishwar Lal, aged about 31 years, son of Umeshwar, resident of
village Chapuadih, P.O. Chapuadih, P.S. Bengabad, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
17. Sanjay Kumar, aged about 40 years, son of Bandhu Ravidas,
resident of village Palmo, P.O. Khariodih, P.S. Hirodih, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
18. Manilal Soren, aged about 28 years, son of Late Sukhlal Soren,
resident of village Keradih, P.O. Phulchi, P.S. Gandey, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
19. Jogendra Kol, aged about 30 years, son of Ashok Kol, resident of
village Guliyadih, P.O. Budhih, P.S. -Ahilyapur, Dist. Giridih,
Jhakrhand.
20. Ashok Kumar, aged about 36 years, son of Tikuchand Mahto,
2
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
resident of village Balthariya, P.O. Nagri, P.S. Nimiaghat, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
21. Kashi Nayak, aged about 38 years, son of Nemchand Nayak,
resident of village Lohedih, P.O. Nagri. P.S. - Nimiaghat, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
22. Anjulus Hembrom, aged about 34 years son of Jovel Hembrom,
resident of villageTilaiya, P.O. Badkitand, P.S. Bengabad, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand
23. Navin Kumar Suman, aged about 39 years son of Ramsewak
Mahto, resident of village Bandkharo, P.O. Bandkharo, P.S. Suriya,
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
24. Satish Kumar, aged about 35 years, son of Taleshwar Mahto,
resident of village - Singdaha, P.O. Bagodih, P.S. Suriya, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
25. Munna Kumar Sharma, aged about 37 years, son of Suresh Mistry,
resident of village Singdaha, Р.О. -Bagodih, P.S. Suriya, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
26. Manmohan Lahakar, aged about 38 years, son of Shankar Pd.
Lahakar, resident of village- Palganj, P.O. Palganj, P.S. Pirtand, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
27. Md. Afzal, aged about 36 years, son of Abdul Gafur, resident of
village - Salaidih Kalan, P.O. Gando, P.S. - Birni, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
28. Aman Nayan Taterway, aged about 33 years, son of Alakh
Niranjan Sahay, resident of village - Hirapur Kolwa, P.O. Haripur,
Kolwa, P.S. Pathrol, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
29. Banti Kumar, aged about 38 years, son of Lalo Das, resident of
village Gandhi Nagar, P.O. Beniadih, P.S. - Giridih, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
30. Rakesh Kumar, aged about 37 years, son of Lalo Das, resident of
3
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Gandhinagar, P.O. Beniadih, P.S. -Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
31. Manish Kumar, aged about 36 years, son of Pramod Ram, resident
of village Salaiya, P.O. Tiklato, P.S. - Bengabad, Dist. - Giridih,
Jharkhand.
32. Pappu Kumar Agarwal, aged about 36 years, son of Gyani Ram
Modi, resident of village Parheta, P.O. -Ahilyapur, P.S. Ahilyapur,
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
33. Satish Kumar Vishwakarma, aged about 27 years, son of
Rameshwar Vishwakarma, resident of village Mohanpur, P.O.
Pachamba, P.S. Pachamba, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
34. Randheer Kumar Das, aged about 30 years, son of Kaleshwar
Ravidas, resident of village Nawagarh, P.O. Nawagarh, Chatti, P.S.
Dhanwar, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
35. Dashrath Pandit, aged about 33 years, son of Devlal Prajapati,
resident of village Kulgo, P.O. Kulgo, P.S. Dumri, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
36. Sunil Kumar Mistri, aged about 37 years, son of Jyoti Barhi,
resident of village Daludih, P.O. Daludih, P.S. Rajganj, Dist. -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
37. Amrit Mandal, aged about 35 years, son of Babulal Mandal,
resident of village Jhitri, P.O. & P.S. Taratand, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
38. Arun Prakash Ravi, aged about 32 years, son of Mahesh Prasad
Singh, resident of village Makatpur Chowk, P.O. & P.S. Giridih, Dist-
Giridih, Jharkhand.
39. Bahadur Kumar Verma, aged about 32 years, son of Bishun
Mahto, resident of village Maghaiya Tolla, P.O. Ranikhawa, P.S.
Pachamba, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
40. Dinesh Kumar Verma, aged about 30 years, son of Sukhdew
Mahto, resident of village Gadi, P.O. Leda, P.S. - Giridih (Muff)
4
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Dist- Giridih, Jharkhand
41. Subash Prasad Verma, aged about 34 years, son of Mahendra
Prasad Verma, resident of village Golhaiya, P.Ο. Siyatand, P.S.
Jamua, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand
42. Mukesh Prasad Verma, aged about 35 years, son of Prameshwar
Prasad Kushwaha, resident of village Barshumbhi Kala, P.Ο.
Sapamaran, P.S. Dhanwar, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
43. Naresh Verma, aged about 33 years, son of Baidyanath Mahto,
resident of village Dharmapur (Parakharo), P.O. Chittardih, P.S.
Jamua, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
44. Santosh Kumar Pandey, aged about 33 years, son of Mahendra
Pandey, resident of village - Darvedih, P.O. Barotand, P.S. Dhanwar,
Dist. Giridih Jharkhand.
45. Vikesh Kumar, aged about 32 years, son of Dasrath Ray, resident
of village Nawadih, P.O. Dhawnwar, P.S. Dhanwar, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
46. Suraj Kumar Paswan, aged about 36 years, son of Bhim Lal Pawan,
resident of village - Rupaidih, P.O. -Rupdih, P.S. Birni, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
47. Shashi Kant Rajak, aged about 32 years, son of Prabhu Rajak,
village Pandankala, P.O. Bangrakala, P.S. Birni, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
48. Khushboo Parween, aged about 29 years, Daughter of Md. Ekram
Ansari, resident of village Dhariyadih, Behind Town Thana, P.O. &
P.S. Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
49. Md. Rashid Ansari, aged about 35 years, son of Jumman Mian,
resident of village Karma, P.O. -Karma, P.S. Birni, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
50. Md. Khursid Alam, aged about 34 years, son Md. Naroon Rashi,
resident of Rajwadih, P.O. & P.S. Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand
5
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
51. Mohan Kumar Das, aged about 33 years, son of Sitaram Das,
resident of village Chhatatand, P.O. Budihyadih, P.S. Giridih, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand
52. Nandkishor Mahli, aged about 30 years, son of Nakul Mahli,
resident of village - Fuljri, P.O. Sirsiya, P.S. Giridih, Dist- Giridih,
Jharkhand.
53. Anil Kumar Verma, aged about 32 years, son of Babulal Mahto,
resident of village Baddiha, P.O. Mirzaganj, P.S. - Jamua, Dist. -
Giridih, Jharkhand.
54. Rakesh Kumar Singh, aged about 38 years, son of Kedar Nath
Singh, resident of village Barjodih, P.O. Chatro, P.S. Deori, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
55. Sanjay Sahu, aged about 34 years, son of Bihari Sahu, resident of
village Kesogondodihi, P.O. Chatro, P.S. Deori, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
56. Ranjeet Kumar Verma, aged about 33 years, son of Rameshool
Mahto, resident of village Baluwahi, P.O. Chiknadih, P.S. Deori,
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
57. Md. Eslam Ansari, aged about 37 years, son of Anwar Ansari,
resident of village Baghaidih, P.O. -Siyatand, P.S. Jamua, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
58. Kumari Khushbu, aged about 29 years, wife of Rajesh Kumar
Sharma, resident of village Bhubhi, P.O. Murpa, P.S. Gola, Dist.
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
59. Upendra Kumar, aged about 42 years, son of Late Yugal Ram,
resident of village Gawan, P.O. & P.S. -Gawan, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
60. Bhuwneshwar Sao, aged about 33 years, son of Rameshwar Saw,
resident of village Palmarua, P.O. - Chandouri, P.S. Tisri, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
6
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
61. Subhash Kumar Das, aged about 42 years, son of Late Gopal
Chandra Das, resident of village - Mugma Basti, P.O. & P.S. Nirsa,
Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand
62. Prince Kumar Sinha, aged about 30 years, son of Amar Kumar
Sinha, resident of Manorama Gyan Kunj, Indrapuri Colony, Arga
Ghat, Giridih, P.Ο. & P.S. Giridih, Jharkhand.
63. Sudesh Kumar Dhan, aged about 38 years, son of Sanicharwa
Munda, resident of village Nayasaray Murma, P.O. Nayarasary
Murma, P.S. Nagri, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand.
64. Arbind Toppo, aged about 35 years, son of Rajednra Toppo,
resident of village Parhepat, P.O. Purio, P.S. Ratu, Dist. Ranchi,
Jharkhand.
65. Pramanand Munda, aged about 33 years, son of Ghanu Munda,
resident of village Nayatoli Anandi, P.O. Baridih, P.S. Ormanjhi,
Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand.
66. Md. Selim Hossain, aged about 32 years, son of Md Obaidur
Rahman, resident of village Jamsherpur, P.O. Kistnagar, P.S. Pakur,
Dist. Pakur, Jharkhand.
67. Md Anuwarul Musadi, aged about 32 years, son of Md. Badrul
Islam, resident of village Chandnagar, P.O. Pritwingar, P.S. Pakur,
Dist. Pakur, Jharkhand.
68. Md. Riyaz Ansari, aged about- 32 years, son of Md Munna Ansari,
resident of village Sonajori, P.O. Pakur, P.S. Pakur, Dist. Pakur,
Jharkhand.
69. Jiauddin Shaikh, aged about 36 years, son of Rukumuddin Shaikh,
resident of Lakhipur, P.O. Khanpur, P.S. - Mahespur, Dist. - Pakur,
Jharkhand.
70. Jayanto Kumar Let, aged about 34 years, son Late Sudhir Let,
resident of village Enthapara, P.O. -Makdhmpur, P.S. Mahespur,
Dist. Pakur, Jharkhand
7
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
71. Sanjeev Bhandari, aged about 32 years, son of Lakhindra
Bhandari, resident of village - Talpahari, P.O. Talpahari, P.S.
Littipara, Dist. Pakur, Jharkhand.
72. Noor Mahammad Sheikh, aged about 35 years, son Majem Sheikh,
resident' of village Lakhipur, P.O. -Khanpur, P.S. Mahespur, Dist. -
Pakur, Jharkhand.
73. Md. Milan Sheikh, aged about 35 years, son of Md. Najrul Sheikh,
resident of village Darajpur, P.O. -Birkitty, P.S. - Maheshpur, Dist. -
Pakur, Jharkhand.
74. Ashok Kumar Singh, aged about 36 years, son of Panchkouri
Singh, resident of village - Banskuli, P.O. - Banskuli, P.S. - Tongra,
Dist. Dumka, Jharkhand.
75. Rajeev Kumar, aged about 36 years, son of Basudev Yadav,
resident of village Shivpahar, P.O. & P.S. Dumka, Dist. Dumka,
Jharkhand.
76. Amit Kumar Sah, aged about 34 years, son of Ashok Kumar Sah,
resident of village Lagwon, P.O. - Lakra Pahari, P.S. Jama, Dist.
Dumka, Jharkhand.
77. Rohit Kumar Keshri, aged about 32 years, son of Kishor Kumar
Keshri, resident of village Karhalbil, P.O. Dumka, P.S. Dumka, Dist.
Dumka Jharkhand.
78. Shankar Kumar Goswami, aged about 40 years, son of Ghanshyam
Goswami, resident of village Lakhikundi, P.O. Dumka, P.S. Dumka,
Dist. Dumka, Jharkhand.
79. Swarup Mandal, aged about 29 years, son of Motilal Mandal,
resident of village Murgabuni, P.O. Partappur, P.S. Ranishwar, Dist.
Dumka, Jharkhand.
80. Chiranjit Chandra, aged about 34 years, son of Ambika Chandra,
resident of village Kumrabad, P.O. Kumrabad, P.S. Dumka, Dist. -
Dumka, Jharkhand.
8
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
81. Rajkishor Manjhi, aged about 33 years, son of Shri Prasad Manjhi,
resident of village Dhodhli, P.O. -Tarajora, P.S. Jama, Dist. Dumka,
Jharkhand.
82. Anand Kumar, aged about 34 years, son of Shambhu Mandal,
Resident of Vill- Baniyara, P.O- baniyara, P.s- Hansdiha, Dist.
Dumka, Jharkhand.
83. Mritunjay Kumar Manjhi, aged about 35 years, son of Nirodh
Chandra Manjhi, resident of village - Thari, P.O. Mahubana, P.S.
Ramgarh, Dist. Dumka, Jharkhand.
84. Shreeram Kushwaha, aged about 32 years, son of Sadanand
Kushwaha, resident of village Hansdiha, P.O. Sitama Tikar, P.S.
Hansdiha, Dist. - Dumka, Jharkhand.
85. Arun Kumar Sharma, aged about 40 years, son of Sri Rupnayaran
Sharma, resident of village Kariyanwan, P.O. Hirodih, P.S. Jainagar,
Dist. Koderma, Jharkhand.
86. Rupesh Kumar, aged about 43 years, son of Lalo Prasad, resident
of village Sihas, P.O. & P.S. Satgawan, Dist. Koderma, Jharkhand.
87. Neeraj Kumar, aged about 31 years, son of Motilal Yadav, resident
of village Makatpur, P.O. & P.S. -Jainagar, Dist. Koderma,
Jharkhand.
88. Santosh Kumar Tiwari, aged about 35 years, son of Gurudeo
Tiwari, resident of village Dumri, P.O. Nandudih, P.S. Satgawan,
Dist. Koderma, Jharkhand.
89. Birju Das, aged about 34 years, son of Shankar Das, resident of
village Gumoh, Ward No. 20, Harijan Mohalla, Jhumari Telaiya, P.O.
& P.S. Koderma, Dist. Koderma, Jharkhand.
90. Manohar Kumar Rana, aged about 30 years, son of Babulal Rana,
resident of village Kariyawan, P.O. -Hirodih, P.S. Jainagar, Dist.
Koderma, Jharkhand.
91. Vipin Marandi, aged about 34 years, son of Vijay Marandi,
9
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
resident of village Patjore, P.O. & P.S. -Bagdahari, Dist.- Jamtara,
Jharkhand.
92. Priya Ranjan, aged about 34 years, son of Birendra Prasad Saw,
resident of village Nawalshahi, P.O. -Nawalshahi, P.S. Domchanch,
Dist. Koderma, Jharkhand.
93. Dinesh Yadav, aged about 33 years, son of Jagdish. Yadav, resident
of village Katahi, P.O. Masmohna, Jainagar, P.S. Jaingar, Dist.
Koderma, Jharkhand.
94. Bhagwat Saw, aged about 33 years, son of Ganesh Saw, resident of
village Mahavir Mohalla, P.Ο. & P.S. - Jainagar, Dist. - Koderma,
Jharkhand.
95. Jeetendra Kumar Singh, aged about 34 years, son Shankar Singh,
resident of village Baradih, P.O. Hirodih, Jaingar, P.S. Jainagar, Dist.
Koderma, Jharkhand.
96. Santosh Kumar Rana, aged about 29 years, son of Rameshwar
Rana, resident of village Dahuwatola, P.O. Hirodih, P.S. Jainagar,
Dist. Koderma, Jharkhand.
97. Jitendra Paswan, aged about 29 years, son of Jageshwar Paswan,
resident of village Makatpur, P.O. Makatpur, P.S. Jainagar, Dist.
Koderma, Jharkhand.
98. Kishan Kumar, aged about 33 years, son of Ramanand Ram,
resident of village Chainpur, P.O. & P.S. - Chainpur, Dist. Palamu,
Jharkhand.
99. Dipak Saw, aged about 29 years, son of Doman saw, resident of
village Nawadih, P.S. Nawadih, P.S. Markacho, Dist. Koderma,
Jharkhand.
100. Pintu Das, aged about 31 years, son of Surendar Das, resident of
village Mahuagarha, P.O. Makatpur, P.S. Jaingar, Dist. Koderma,
Jharkhand.
101. Kumar Devraj, aged about 36 years, son of Ashish Kumar Tiwary,
10
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
resident of village Sareskunda, P.O. Sareskunda, P.S. Nala, Dist.
Jamtara, Jharkhand.
102. Gourab Bharat, aged about 35 years, son of Rajni Kant Verma,
resident of village Gopalpur, P.O. & P.S. Nala, Dist. Jamtara,
Jharkhand.
103. Arvind Kumar, aged about 34 years, son of Sri Kashinath Sah,
resident of Sonthalia, Campus, Kanibag, P.Ο. Ashram, P.S. Kunda,
Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
104. Vikash kumar Jha, aged about 34 years, son of Sri jay Kishor Jha,
resident of Pt. B. N. Jha Road, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, Dist.
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
105. Ashish Kumar Jha, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Kapildeo Jha,
resident of Kalirakha June Pokhar, Ward No. 30, Deoghar, P.O. &
P.S. Deoghar, Dist. -Deoghar, Jharkhand.
106. Chandra Kishor Jha, aged about 36 years, son of Sri Jay Kishor Jha,
resident of Pt. B. N. Jha Road, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, Dist.
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
107. Saket Raman Singh, aged about 34 years, son of Sri Kanti Prasad
Singh, resident of village Khaijuriya, P.O. Chanddih, P.S. Kunda,
Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
108. Ranjan Kumar, aged about 36 years, son of Sri Sudhir Jha, resident
of village Pahariya, P.O. -Pahariya, P.S. Sarwan, Dist. Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
109. Vinay Kumar Rai, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Dilip Kumar Rai,
resident of village Balthar, P.O. Ramudih, P.S. Devipur, Dist.
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
110. Umesh Kumar, aged about 38 years, son of Sri Sahdeo Poddar,
resident of village Chandan, P.O. Chandan, P.S. Chandan, Dist.
Banka, Bihar.
111. Abhishek Kumar Ambastha, aged about 36 years, son of Late
11
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Binay Kumar Ambastha, resident of village Tabhaghat, P.O. & P.S.
Jasidih, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
112. Rohit Kumar Pandit, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Yamuna
Pandit, resident of village Gonderdih, Sangramloria, P.O.
Sangramloira, P.S. Jasidih, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
113. Pankaj Kumar Agarwal, aged about 38 years, son of Sri Sikandar,
Agarwal, Rresident of village Tarabad, P.O. & P.S. Rikhiya, Dist.
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
114. Irfan Ahmad, aged about 32 years, son of Mohmad Kutbul Ansari
resident of village Chanddih, P.O. Chanddih, P.S. - Kunda, Dist. -
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
115. Sumit Kumar Sinha, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Deepak
Kumar Sinha, resident of House No.-2, Bandgari, P.Ο. Burhai, P.S.
Devipur, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
116. Rahul Kumar, aged about 33 years, son of Late Sunil Kumar,
resident of Sunil Bhawan, Near Divya Jyoti Clinic, Castair Town
Deoghar, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, Dist. - Deoghar, Jharkhand.
117. Amit Kumar, aged about 33 years, son of Late Etwari Hari,
resident of Mohalla J.P Nagar, Karbala Road, Giridih, P.O. & P.S.
Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand
118. Pratap Boral, aged about 40 years, son of Late Pranab Boral,
resident of Deoghar Guest House, P.O. & P.S. Kunda, Dist. Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
119. Milan Kumar, aged about 42 years, son of Sri Dina Nath Tiwary,
resident of village Koldih, P.Ο. Sabaijore, P.S. Sarath, Dist. Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
120. Manoj Kumar, aged about 40 years, son of Sri Deven Prasad
Manjhi, resident of village Raksa, P.O. Roundhiya, P.S. Sariya Hat,
Dist. Dumka, Jharkhand.
121. Amrit Anand, aged about 39 years, son of Late Umesh Chandra
12
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Jha, resident of village Kushmaha, P.O. Kushmaha, P.S. Madhupur,
Dist.- Deoghar, Jharkhand.
122. Vishal Kumar Sharan, aged about 32 years, son of Late Vijay
Kumar Sharan, resident of Kumhar Toli Bherwa, P.O. & P.S.
Madhupur, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
123. Md. Aftab Alam, aged about 40 years, son of Abdul Hakim,
resident of Mohalla 52 Bigha, P.O. & P.S. Madhupur, Dist. Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
124. Goutam Kumar Singh, aged about 38 years, son of Sri Kamleshwar
Prasad Singh, resident of village Chand Chora, P.O. Ranidih, P.S.
Karon, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
125. Guru Charan Khandait, aged about 40 years, son of Uday Kishore
Khandit, resident of village Harira, P.O. Dalki, P.S. Tonot, Dist. West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
126. Shiv Nath Gupta, aged about 29 years, son of Satish Prasad Gupta,
resident of village Bari Bazar, P.O. -Chaibasa, P.S. Sadar, Dist. West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
127. Biju Kumar Lohra, aged about 32 years, son of Shibu Lohra,
resident of village Gelen Bhatti, Ward No.-06, Chakradharpur, P.O.
& P.S. Chakradharpur, Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
128. Rani Majhi, aged about 43 years, daughter of Ramo Majhi,
resident of village Ichindasai, Potka, P.O & P.S. Chakradharpur,
Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
129. Chetanand Mahto, aged about 36 years, son of Banbihari Mahto,
resident of village Mahto Deogaon, P.O. Nakti, P.S. Saraikela Dist. -
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
130. Anand Kumar Gope aged about 39 years, son of Sukra Gope,
resident of village Pendargariya, P.O. Kathbhari, P.S. Manjhari,
Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
131. Raimuni Samad, aged about 31 years, daughter of Kumar Samad,
13
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
resident of village Rungsai, P.O. Hathiya, P.S. Chakardharpur, Dist.
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
132. Akash Kumar, aged about 32 years, son of Chandra Bhanu Prasad
Gupta, resident of village Chota Nimdih Birsa Chowk, Chaibasa,
P.O. & P.S-Chaibasa, Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
133. Rakesh Kumar, aged about 41 years, son of Late Krishna Prasad,
resident of village Manoharpur, P.O. & P.S. Manoharpur, Dist. West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
134. Komal Gupta, aged about 32 years, daughter of Ajit Gupta,
resident of village Nandpur, P.O. & P.S. -Manoharpur, Dist.- West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
135. Naresh Kumar Ram, aged about 32 years, son of Murli Ram
resident of village Baddiha, P.O. - Loki, Dist. Koderma, Jharkhand.
.... Appellants/Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Ministry Rural
Development (Panchayati Raj), Ranchi, Government of Jharkhand
having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.
Jagannathpur, District - Ranchi.
2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj & NREP (Special Division
Department) Government of Jharkhand having its office at Project
Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Jagannathpur, District- Ranchi
3. The Director, Panchayati Raj, Directorate of Panchayati Raj,
Governemnt of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi.
4. The Deputy Commissionser, Giridih, P.O. & P.S. Giridih, Dist. -
Giridih.
5. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, Giridih, P.O. & P.S. - Giridih, Dist. - Giridih.
14
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
6. The Deputy Commissionser, Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, Dist. -
Dhanbad.
7. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, Dist. -
Dhanbad.
8. The Deputy Commissionser, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. -Ranchi, Dist. -
Ranchi.
9. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. - Ranchi, Dist. Ranchi.
10. The Deputy Commissionser, Pakur, P.O. & P.S. Pakur, Dist. - Pakur
11. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, Pakur, P.O. & P.S. Pakur, Dist. - Pakur.
12. The Deputy Commissionser, Dumka, P.O. & P.S. Dumka, Dist. -
Dumka.
13. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, Dumka, P.O. & P.S. - Dumka, Dist. - Dumka.
14. The Deputy Commissionser, Koderma, P.O. & P.S. -Koderma, Dist. -
Koderma.
15. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, Koderma, P.O. & P.S. Koderma, Dist.
Koderma.
16. The Deputy Commissionser, Jamtara, P.O. & P.S. Jamtara, Dist. -
Jamtara.
17. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, Jamtara, P.O. & P.S. - Jamtara, Dist. Jamtara.
18. The Deputy Commissionser, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, Dist. -
Deoghar.
19. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
15
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Officer, Zila Parishad, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S. - Deoghar, Dist. Deoghar.
20. The Deputy Commissionser, West Singhbhum, P.O. & P.S. West
Singhbhum, Dist. - West Singhbhum.
21. The Deputy Development Commissionser-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, West Singhbhum, P.O. & P.S. West
Singhbhum, Dist. West Singhbhum.
22. The Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture
and Farmers Welfare, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj,
Government of India, having its office at Krishi Bhawan, New
Delhi, P.O. + P.S. New Delhi.
.... Respondents/Respondents
23. Chandan Kumar Sinha, aged about 37 years, son of Shiv Narayan
Prasad, resident of village- Mahesiadighi, P.O. Chatra, P.S. Deori,
Dist. - Giridih, Jharkhand.
24. Subhash Kumar, aged about 34 years, son of Ram Krishna Pandit,
resident of village Lailibad, P.O. Karharbari, P.S. Giridih (Muff.),
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
25. Sanjay Kumar, aged about 36 years, son of Budhdeo
Vishwakarma, resident of village Handadih, P.O. -Handadih, P.S.
Pachamba, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
26. Vidya Kushwaha, aged about 28 years, son of Harihar Mahto,
resident of village Karmatand, P.O. Leda, P.S. Giridih (Muff.), Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand
27. Avijeet Kumar, aged about 31 years, son of Lalit Prasad Barnwal,
resident of Bahbhntoli, Opposite Gadena Gali, P.O. & P.S. Giridih,
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
28. Vaidyaraj Sushen, aged about 33 years,son of Gangaram Mishra,
resident of village Purana Kharna, P.Ο. Fulchuwan, P.S. Sarat, Dist.
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
16
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
29. Ramesh Soren, aged about 30 years, son of Pitho Soren, resident
of village - Mohanpur, P.O. Tiklatoli, P.S. - Bengabad, Dist. Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
30. Manoj Soren, aged about 40 years, son of Martin Soren, resident
of village Khorimahua, P.O. Gandey, P.S. - Gandey, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
31. Vikash Kumar Verma, aged about 34 years, son of Nageshwar
Prasad Verma, resident of village Yaduraidhi, P.O. Chiknadih, P.S.
Deori, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
32. Krishna Kumar Yadav, aged about 33 years, son of Ganesh Yadav,
resident of village Khoto, P.O. Khijuri, P.S. Tisri, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
33. Roshila Murmu, aged about 28 years, daughter of Lalo Murmu,
resident of village Jamao, P.O. Lokay, P.S. Lokay, Nayanpur, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
34. Jitendra Kumar, aged about 32 years, son of Braj Bihari Ram
resident of village Chandauri, P.O. Chandauri, P.S. Tisri, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
35. Chandan Kumar Das, aged about 33 years, son of Daulat Das,
resident of village Kamarshali, P.O. -Chaitadih, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
36. Gautam Kumar, aged about 29 years, son of Yamuna Das, resident
of village Palganj, P.O. & P.S. Pirtand, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
37. Anil Tudu, aged about 34 years, son of Sonalal Tudu, resident of
village Rangamati, P.O. Khurchutta, P.S. - Bengabad, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
38. Priyanka Tudu, aged about 27 years, wife of Ramesh Soren,
resident of village Mohanpur, P.O. Tiklato, P.S. Bengabad, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
39. Ramdeo kumar Verma, aged about 36 years, son of Bishwanath
17
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Mahto, resident of village Lakathahi, P.O. Motileda, P.S. Bengabad,
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
40. Md. Samruddin Ansari, aged about 36 years, son of Md. Hajrat Ali
Ansari, resident of village Singiatand, P.O. & P.S. - Baliyapur, Dist. -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
41. Shivdhan Tudu, aged about 35 years, son of Gishu Tudu, resident
of village Sahardal, P.O. Sahardal, P.S. Mahijam, Dist. Jamtara,
Jharkhand.
42. Ajit kumar Rana, aged about 30 years, son of Santan Rana,
resident of village Matrukha, P.O. & P.S. Giridih, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
43. Ramdeo Kumar Thakur, aged about 36 years son of Ghanshyama
Thakur, resident of village Jhariyagadi, P.O. & P.S. Giridih, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
44. Jawed Equbal, aged about 35 years, son of Md. Shafiullah, resident
of Mohalla Mohanpur, P.O. & P.S. Pachamba, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
45. Janardan Kumar Verma, aged about 34 son of Krishna Kumar
Mahto; resident of Ward No.-13, Pandeydih, Jagdihnagar, P.O.
Sirsiya, P.S. Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
46. Abhishek Anand, aged about 30 years, son of Prem Prasad,
resident of village Gardenagali, P.O. Giridih, P.S. Town Thana
Giridih, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
47. Shashi Kumar Gupta, aged about 39 years, son of Raghubir Ram,
resident of village - Dewandih, P.O. -Maheshmunda, P.S. Gandey,
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
48. Md. Rafik Ansari, aged about 35 years, son of Md. Manjur Hussain,
resident of village Chamapur, P.O. Mandro, P.S. Gandey, Dist.
Giridih, Jharkhand.
49. Md. Mustaque Ansari, aged about 34 years, son of Md. Kurban
18
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Ansari, resident of village Kodadih P.O. Simaria, P.S., Dhanwar,
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
50. Pappu Kumar Verma, aged about 35 years, son of Parmeshwar
Mahto, resident of village Shali Baddiha, P.O. Baddiha, P.S. Hirodih
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
51. Md. Ziyaul Ansari, aged about 35 years, son of Jamaluddin Ansari,
resident of Bariyarpur, P.O. Tara, P.S. Jamua, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
52. Vikash Kumar Verma, aged about 31 years, son of Chetlal Verma,
resident of village Bergi, P.O. Sirsiya, P.S.- Giridih, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
53. Md. Sultan, aged about 31 years, son of Md. BO. Bhandaridih, P.S.
Qamruddin, resident of village Bhandaridih, P.O. and P.S. Giridih,
Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
54. Pallavi Priya, aged about 32 years, daughter of Suresh Prasad,
resident of village Anishabad, Ali Nagar Colony, P.O. Anishabad,
P.S. Patna Dist. -Patna, Bihar
55. Ramesh Tudu, aged about 29 years, son of Ruplal Tudu, resident
of village Maniyadih, P.O. & P.S. Gandey, Dist. Giridih, Jharkhand.
56. Md. Umar Faruque, aged about 32 years, son of Md. Usman
resident of Belwana, P.O Chandouri, P.S. Tisri, Dist. Giridih,
Jharkhand.
57. Ramesh Kumar Mahato, aged about 34 years , son of Babulal
Mahto, resident village Udaypur, P.O. Kalyanpur, P.S.. Barwadda,
Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
58. Naresh Mandal, aged about 37 years, son of Ramdev Mandal,
resident village Tumadaha, P.O. Bhitia, P.S. Barwadda, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand. Permanent address village Sabanpur, P.Ο.
Sabanpur, P.S. Narayanpur, Dis.. Jamtara, Jharkhand
59. Md. Ali Hussain, aged about 35 years, son of Asruddin Ansari,
19
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
resident of village - Nawatand, P.O. Nadkhurki, P.S. Barawadda,
Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
60. Rajesh Mallah, aged about 42 years, son of Nand Kishor Mallah,
resident of village Telulunari (Chandorbandh), P.O. & P.S.
Telulunari, Dist. -Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
61. Umesh Kumar Pramanik, aged about 43 years, son of Laxmi Ram
Pramanik, resident of village Chhatabad, P.O. B.I.T. Sindri, P.S.
Baliapur, Dist. - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
62. Rajesh Rawani, aged about 33 years, son of Suresh Rawani,
resident of village Harina, P.O.- Nawagad, P.S. Barora, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
63. Munu Hansda, aged about 35 years, son of Puran Hansda, resident
of village- Shitalpur, P.O.- Gharbar, P.S.- Baliapur, Pin Code 828201,
Dist.- Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
64. Hemant Kumar Mahato, aged about 33 years, son of Satish
Chandra Mahato, resident of village - Maricho, P.O. Panjaniya, P.S.
Barawadda, Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
65. Rajesh Kumar Mahato, aged about 35 years, son of Debu Mahato,
resident of village Baghmara (Amtand), P.O. Baghmara, P.S.
Baliapur, Dist. -Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
66. Amit Kumar Pramanik, aged about 37 years, son of Bhartendu
Harish Chandra Thakur, resident of village - Near Rahul Chwok,
P.O. & P.S. Katrasgarh, Dist. - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
67. Manoj Kumar Roy, aged about 41 years, son of Haradhan Roy,
resident of village Kusumdaha, P.O. - Dumuria, P.S. Nirsa, Dist. -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
68. Pappu Kumar Das, aged about 35 years, son of Late Dulal Rabidas,
resident of village Pithakiyari, P.O. -Nirsa, P.S. Nirsa, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
69. Chandan Haldar, aged about 41 years, son of Mohitosh Haldar,
20
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
resident of village - Ubchuriya, P.O. Poddardih, P.S. Nirsa, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
70. Purna Chandra Gorai, aged about 33 years, son of Srikant Gorai,
resident of village Belkupa, P.O. Debiana, P.S. Nirsa, Dist. Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
71. Sanjeeb Sen, aged about 35 years, son of Late Paritosh Sen,
resident of village Pandra, P.Ο. Pandra, P.S. Nirsa, Dist. Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
72. Md. Shamim Ansari, aged about 39 years, son of Md. Kassimuddin
Ansari, resident of village - Urma, Tola Kharadih, P.O. Urma, P.S.
Nirsa, Dist. - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
73. Kumari Sumi, aged about 35 years, daughter of Rajkumar Ram,
resident of village Pithakiyari, P.O. & P.S. Nirsa, Dist. - Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
74. Partha Sarathi Sahana, aged about 42 years, son of Banamali
Sahana, resident of village Bhaljoria, P.O. Nirsa, P.S. Nirsa, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
75. Deepak Kumar Sharma, aged about 37 years, son of Shaligram
Mistri, resident of village Baramuri, P.O. Dhanbad, P.S. Dhanbad,
Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
76. Md Neyaz Uddin, aged about 35 years, son of Md Faruque,
resident of village Bhikhrajpur, P.O. Baliapur, P.S. Baliapur, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
77. Jagdeep Rajak, aged about 32 years son of Umashankar Rajak,
resident of village Surunga, P.O. Surunga, P.S. Tirsa, Dist. Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
78. Rakesh Kumar Mahato, aged about 32 years, son of Anand Lal
Mahato, resident of village New Paharigora, Surunga, P.O. Khas
Jeenagora, P.S. -Baliapur, Dist.- Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
79. Sujit Soren, aged about 39 years, son of Lodhiya Soren, resident of
21
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
village Gandhi Nagar Kawabandh, P.O. K.G. Ashram Govindpur, P.S.
Govindpur, Dist. - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
80. Ritesh Kumar Singh, aged about 36 years, son of Chanchal Prasad
Singh, resident of village - Lahbani, P.O. ISM, P.S. Dhanbad, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
81. Md. Shahabuddin Ansari, aged about 36 years, son of Md.
Basiruddin Ansari, resident of village - Gahira, Murgabani, P.O.
Jangalpur, P.S. Govindpur, Dist. - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
82. Shyamal Kumar Mahato, aged about 34 years, son of Hemlal
Mahato, resident of village Narodih, P.O. Ambona, P.S. Govindpur,
Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
83. Rajan Kumar, aged about 32 years, son of Tulsi Vishwakarma,
resident of village Belatand, P.O. Baddiha, P.S. - Giridih, Dist. -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
84. Sandeep Kumar Dutta, aged about 41 years, son of Chandi Charan
Dutta, resident of village - Ranguni, P.O. Shramik Nagar Bhuli, P.S.
Tetulmari, Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
85. Kisun Hasda, aged about 36 years, son of Misir Hasda, resident of
village Pandungari, P.O. Lodhria, P.S. - Tundi, Dist. - Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
86. Sunil Kisku, aged about 29 years, son of Chaoupal Kisku, resident
of village - Luppi, P.O. Luppi, P.S. -Bengabad, Dist. - Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
87. Pradeep Kumar Das, aged about 41 years, son of Sripati Ravi Das,
resident of village Godhar Kurmidih, P.O. & P.S. Kenduadih, Dist.-
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
88. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, aged about 35 years, son of Chhedi
Sharma, resident of village Co-operative Colony, Near Ram Nagar,
BCCL Township, P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
89. Jiyaul Haque Ansari, aged about 35 years, son of Lal Mohammad
22
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Ansari, resident of village Bhitia, P.O. Bhitia, P.S. Govindpur, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand. Permanent Address: village Babudih, P.O.
Silfore, P.S. Pindrajora, Dist. Bokaro, Jharkhand
90. Sati Sabitri Bauri, aged about 35 years, dauthter of Nitai Bauri,
resident of village Amkura, P.Ο. Maithon Dam, P.S. 'Maithon, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
91. Sushil Rawani, aged about 38 years, son of Sufal Rawani, resident
of village Kairabank, P.O. Keliasole, P.S. - Nirsa, Dist. - Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
92. Somen Chatterjee, aged about 37 years, son of Sukumar
Chatterjee, resident of village Daldali, P.O. Daldali, P.S. Nirsa, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
93. Pradeep Kumar Singh, aged about 38 years, son of Dhananjay
Prasad Singh, resident of village Kacharra, P.O. Bhatdih, P.S.
Mahuda, Dist. -Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
94. Bishnu Prasad Tiwary, aged about 40 years, son of Late Bhavtaran
Tiwary, resident of village Belakhonda, P.O. Bhatdih, P.S. Mahuda,
Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
95. Nikhil Chandra Mandal, aged about 39 years, son of Sanchay
Mandal, resident of village Rangamati Rajabasti, P.O. Sindri, P.S.
Baliapur Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
96. Md Nazrul Ansari, aged about 35 years, son of Md Mumtaz Ansari,
resident of village Bhitia, P.O. Bhitia, P.S. Govindpur, Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
97. Firoja Shabnam, aged about 35 years, Daughter of Seraj Anwar,
resident of village Susnilewa, P.O. -Nagnagar, P.S. Barwadda Dist.
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
98. Limma Munmun Das, aged about 36 years, Daughter of Sri Brijesh
Kumar Das, resident of Nutun Villa, House No.-242, Lipidih,
Gosaidih, P.O. Kolakusma, P.S. Saraidhela, Dist. Dhanbad,
23
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Jharkhand.
99. Mohammad Wakil Raza, aged about 38 years, son Of Mohammad
Altaf Hussain, resident of G.T. Road, Taldanga, P.O. & P.S.
Chirkunda, Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
100. Abhijit Mitra, aged about 40 years, son of Pradip Mitra, resident of
village Maheshpur, P.O. Maheshpur, P.S. Madhuban, Dist. Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
101. Md. Wasim Akram Ansari, aged about 34 years, son of Md.
Noushad Ansari, resident of village Bhitia, P.O. Bhitia, P.S.
Govindpur, Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand
102. Amit beck, aged about 39 years, son of Fagu Beck, resident of
Quarter No. 8/1292, Sector-II, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Jagannathpur,
Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand.
103. Bishnu Kumar, aged about 35 years, son of Radha Krishna Ram,
resident of village Sugnu, P.O. Sugnu, P.S. - Khelgaon, Dist. Ranchi,
Jharkhand.
104. Raj Kumar Saha, aged about 33 years, son of Late Lal Chand Saha,
resident of village Hathkathi, P.O. & P.S. - Hiranpur, Dist. Pakur,
Jharkhand.
105. Dwibendu Mondal, aged about 33 years, son of Late Dashrath
Mandal, resident of Railway Colony, Sidharth Nagar, P.O. & P.S.
Pakur, Dist. Pakur, Jharkhand.
106. Gora Chand Pandit, aged about 35 years, son of Pankaj Pandit,
resident of village Rampur, P.O. -Dhowadangal, P.S. Hirnapur, Dist.
Pakur, Jharkhand.
107. Ashish Kumar Bhagat, aged about 35 years, son of Anil Kumar
Bhagat, resident of village Maheshpur, P.O. & P.S. Maheshpur, Dist.
Pakur, Jharkhand.
108. Baku Rabidas, aged about 32 years, son of Subodh Rabidas,
resident of village Palsa, P.O. Radipur, P.S. - Mahespur, Dist. Pakur,
24
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Jharkhand.
109. Dinanath Kumar Mandal, aged about 33 years, son of Jalu Prasad
Mandal, resident of village Khidirpur, P.O. Devpur, P.S. Hiranpur,
Dist. Pakur, Jharkhand.
110. Biren Bardhan, aged about 34 years, son of Late Swadesh
Bardhan, resident of Harindanga Bazar, Near Railway Gate, P.O.
and P.S. Pakur, Dist. Pakur, Jharkhand.
111. Asiful Alam, aged about 33 years, son of Late Safiuddin Sheikh,
resident of village- Sirajpur, P.O. Makdampur, P.S. Mahespur, Dist-
Pakur, Jharkhand
112. Vikash Kumar Pal, aged about 31 years, son of Dinesh Kumar Pal,
resident of village Susniya, P.O. Guhiajori, P.S. - Dumka, Dist. -
Dumka, Jharkhand.
113. Akshay Kumar, aged about 35 years, son of Kashi Nath Das,
resident of village Rasikpur, P.O. & P.S. -Dumka, Dist. -Dumka,
Jharkhand.
114. Sushil Kumar Kisku, aged about 32 years, son of Bhado Kumar
Kisku, resident of village Dumria, P.O. Makrampur, P.S. Masalia,
Dist. -Dumka, Jharkhand.
115. Noha Soren, aged about 32 years, son of Rasik Soren, resident of
village Bagdubi, P.O. Kuruwa, P.S. Dumka, Dist. -Dumka,
Jharkhand.
116. Pradeep Murmu, aged about 33 years, son of Chhotu Murmu,
resident of village Harwadih, P.O. - Purana Dumka, P.S. -Dumka,
Dist. Dumka, Jharkhand.
117. Bablu Besra, aged about 32 years, son of Ramjit Besra, resident of
village Patosimal, P.O. Pratappur, P.S. Shikaripara, Dist. -Dumka,
Jharkhand.
118. Vishal Marandi, aged about 32 years, son of Late Dhona Marandi,
resident of village -HLakarjoriya, P.O. Nachangariya, P.S. Jama,
25
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Dist. Dumka, Jharkhand.
119. Neelam Kumari, aged about 33 years, daughter of Raj Kishore
Sharma, resident of Baganpara Dumka, P.O. - Dumka, P.S. Dumka,
Dist. -Dumka, Jharkhand.
120. Shipu Kumari, aged about 31 years, daughter of Rajendra Parasad
Bhagat, resident of village Kharoni Bazar, P.O. Karudih, P.S.
Gopikandar, Dist. -Dumka, Jharkhand.
121. Heena Kumari, aged about 31 years, daughter of Uma Shankar
Yadav, resident of village Bhairopur, P.O. Bhairopur, P.S. Jama, Dist.
Dumka, Jharkhand.
122. Krishna Kumar, aged about 37 years, son of Mahendra Saw,
resident of village Lokai, P.O. & P.S. - Koderma, Dist. Koderma,
Jharkhand.
123. Ravi Kumar, aged about 30 years, son of Pritesh Domchanch
Kumar, resident of Domchanch Bazar, P.O. P.S. -Koderma, Dist.
Koderma, Jharkhand.
124. Pradeep Kumar Sharma, aged about 30 years, son of Rabindra
Sharma, resident of village - Mahuagarah, P.O. Jainagar, P.S.
Koderma, Dist. Koderma, Jharkhand.
125. Avinash Kumar Yadav, aged about 30 years, son of Rajendra Yadav,
resident of New Colony, P.O. Dudhimati, P.S. - Koderma, Dist.
Koderma, Jharkhand.
126. Vikash Yadav, aged about 31 years, son of Lakshman Yadav,
resident of village - Baradih, P.O. -Hirodih, P.S. Jainagar, - Dist.
Koderma, Jharkhand.
127. Vikash Kumar, aged about 30 years, son of Shyam Bihari Rajak,
resident of village Lochanpur, P.O. & P.S. Koderma, Dist. Koderma,
Jharkhand.
128. Gobinda Prasad Ghosh, aged about 29, son of Shakti Pada Ghosh,
resident of village - Dalabar, P.O. & P.S. - Nala, Dist. Jamtara,
26
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Jharkhand.
129. Biplab Dey, aged about 33 years, son of Jay Gopal Dey, resident of
village Deoli, P.S. Nala, Dist. Jamtara, Jharkhand.
130. Shiv Kumar Roy, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Ajit Kumar Roy,
resident of village Jogiyatikur Panchayat, Dakay, P.O. Manighari,
P.S.- Sarwan, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
131. Ranjit Pandit, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Ghutar Pandit,
resident of village Ratanpur, P.O. & P.S. Jasidih, Dist. Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
132. Suresh Kumar Keshri, aged about 38 years, son of Sri Ashok
Prasad Keshri, resident of Dukhi Sah Road, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar,
Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand
133. Roshan Jha, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Nilkanth Jha, resident
of village Lakhoria, P.O. Lakhoria, P.S. - Sarwan, Dist. - Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
134. Ajay Kumar Dubey, aged about 36 years, son of Sri Udit Narayan
Dubey, resident of Srikant Road Belabagan, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S.
Deoghar, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
135. Radha Govind, aged about 42 years, son of Late Uma Shankar
Mishra, resident of village Dharampur, Simra Road, P.O. & P.S.
Jasidih, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
136. Somnath Prasad Gupta, aged about 40 years, son of Sri Vishnu
Prasad Gupta, resident of Near Bhagwan Takij Shailwala Ray
Road, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
137. Ajay Kumar, aged about 36 years, son of late Thakur Das, resident
of Srikant Road Belabagan Durgabari Road, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S.
Deoghar, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
138. Amit Kumar, aged about 40 years, son of Sri Hareram Sharma,
resident of Jatahi, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
27
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
139. Vikas Kumar Ram, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Indra Narayan
Ram, resident of village Sagdaha, P.O. & P.S. - Jasidih, Dist. -
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
140. Vivekanand Mandal, aged about 33 years, son of Sri Hiramani
Mandal, resident of village Suardehi, P.O. Chulhiya, P.S. Mohanpur,
Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
141. Kalyan Suman, aged about 35 years, son of Late Mahendra Mahto,
resident of village Tilayiyamanjhiyana, P.O. Jhalar, P.S. Mohanpur,
Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
142. Robin Kumar, aged about 37 years, son of Sri Bibhash Pd. Tiwary,
resident of Adarsh Colony, Rampur, P.O. Malhara P.S. Mohanpur,
Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand.
143. Manoranjan Rana, aged about 40 years, son of Sri Prahlad Rana,
resident of village - Chittolodhiya, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, District -
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
144. Arbind Kumar Roy, aged about 36 years, son of Sri Triveni Prasad
Roy, resident of village Pathrdda, P.O. Pathrdda, P.S. - Sarath,
District - Deoghar.
145. Manoranjan Yadav, aged about 33 Years, son of Sri nuneshwar
Yadav, resident of village Thari, P.O. Lakhoria, P.S. Sarwan, District
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
146. Parmeshwar Kumar Mandal, aged about 38 years, son of Sri
Jagdish Prasad Mandal, resident of village Gaoripur, P.O.
Chanddih, P.S. Kunda, District -Deoghar, Jharkhand.
147. Bikash Chandra Jha, aged about 40 Years, son of Sri Asheswar Jha,
resident of village Jamuni, P.O. P.S. Pathrol, Dist. Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
148. Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, aged about 41 years, son of Sri Ratan
Prasad Yadav, resident of Mohalla Lord Sinha Road, Belpara P.O. &
P.S. Madhupur, Dist. -Deoghar, Jharkhand.
28
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
149. Md Nomaan, aged about 38 years, son of Md. Israil, resident of
Mohalla Panah Koka, P.O. & P.S. Madhupur, Dist. - Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
150. Md. Razauddin, aged about 38 years, son of Md. Jumaruddin,
resident of village Patwabad, P.O. & P.S. Madhupur, Dist. Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
151. Sachin Kumar, aged about 39 years, son of Late Laxman Mistri,
resident of Bada Shekh Pura, P.O. & P.S. Madhupur, Dist. Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
152. Ajit Kumar Tiwary, aged about 32, son of Ravendra Tiwary,
resident of village Kharkuwa, P.O. & P.S. -Devipur, Dist. - Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
153. Raju Kumar, aged about 41 years, son of Late Ganga Prasad Saw,
resident of Jhumka Mohalla, Ward No.-10, Chakradharpur, P.O. &
P.S. Chakradharpur, Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
154. Amit Kumar Ghosh, aged about 36 years, son of Santosh Ghosh,
resident of New Colony Tungri, P.O. - Chaibasa, P.S. Muffasil, Dist.
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
155. Monika Pan, aged about 38 years, daughter of Late Dwarika Pan,
resident of village - Madangjahir, P.O. -Sonua, P.S. Sonua., Dist.
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
156. Gunjan Sundi, aged about 31 years, son of Jaipal Sundi, resident of
village Tungri, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Muffasil, Dist. West Singhbhum,
Jharkhand.
157. Akash Purty, aged about 30 years, son of Birsingh Purty, resident
of village Tutugutu, P.O. Surjabasa, P.S. Jhinkpani, Dist. West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
158. Shyam Machua, aged about 31 years, son of Late Bisun Machua,
resident of village Chhota Nimdih, P.O. Chaibasa P.S. Sadar, Dist.,
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
29
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
159. Bablu Kumar Prajapati, aged about 31 years, son of Ram Vilash
Prajapati, resident of village Kumhar Toli, Chaibasa, P.O. Chaibasa,
P.S. Sadar, Dist. -West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
160. Vishal Ram, aged about 39 years, son of Santosh Ram, resident of
village Mochisai, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist. - West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
161. Brajesh Kumar Gupta, aged about 33 years, son of Binod Gupta,
resident of village Pulhatu, Bari Bazar, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Sadar,
Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
162. Jingi Mai Jonko, aged about 36 years, daughter of Rengo Jonko,
resident of village Jonkosashan, P.O. Keyadchalam, P.S. Muffasil,
Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
163. Piyush Kumar Sahu, aged about 40 years, son of Guru Prasad
Sahu, resident of village Kera, P.O. Kera, P.S. Chakradharpur, Dist.
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
164. Surendra Yadav, aged about 40 years, son of Harihar Yadav,
resident of village Barbil, P.O. Bhagabila, P.S. - Manjhari, Dist. -
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
165. Rajesh Kumar Mahato, aged about 35 years, son of Jawahar Lal
Mahato, resident of village Siyaljora, P.O. Siyaljora, P.S.
Jagannathpur, Dist. - West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
166. Poonam Birua, aged about 35 years, daughter of Late Sadhu
Birua, resident of village Bara Pokhria, P.O. Pilka, P.S. Manjhari
Jharkhand., Dist.West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
167. Pawan Kumar Nishad, aged about 36 years, son of Mohan Lal
Nishad, resident of village Bara Nimdih, P.O. & P.S. Chaibasa, Dist.
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
168. Guru Charan Soren, aged about 30 years, son of Bhogendra Soren,
resident of village Jhingamarcha, P.O. Sonua, P.S. Sonua, Dist. West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
30
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
169. Farheen Kunkal, aged about 33 years, daughter of Gauri Shankar
Kunkal, resident of village - Dokatta, P.O. Birua Tonto, P.S.
Manjhari, Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
170. Ramesh Kumar Rajak, aged about 42 years, son of Jawahar Lal
Rajak, resident of village Jhumka Mohalla, Ward No.-10, P.O. & P.S.
Chakradharpur, Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
171. Bhavik Kumar Chawda, aged about 32 years, son of Dinesh
Chawda, resident of Rathor Colony, Gadikhana, Railway Station
Road, Chaibasa, P.O. & P.S. Chaibasa, Dist. West Singhbhum,
Jharkhand.
172. Asai Tubid, aged about 31 years, daughter of Paikiray Tubid,
resident of village Dalki, P.O. Dalki, P.S. Jhinkpani, Dist. West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand
173. Kamal Kumar Vishwakarma, aged about 32 years, son of Rajen
Vishwakarma, resident of village Chota Nimdih, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S.
Sadar, Dist. - West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
174. Shankar Kunkal, aged about 28 years, son of Krishna Kunkal,
resident of village Raikola, P.O. Kheriatanagar, P.S. Manjhari, Dist.
West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
175. Ashish Pan, aged about 28 years, son of Bhagirathi Pan, resident
of village Bara Jambani, P.O. - Bara Jambani, P.S. Kumardungi, Dist.
West Singhbum, Jharkhand.
176. Kaushal Kumar, aged about 30 years, son of Munshi Yadav,
resident of village Alagdha, P.O. Makatpur, P.S. Koderma Jainagar,
Dist. - Koderma, Jharkhand.
177. Dilip Kumar Pandit, aged about 33 years, son of Dulo Pandit,
resident of village Bichhipahari, P.O. Bekobar, P.S. Koderma, Dist.
Koderma, Jharkhand.
...Petitioners/ProformaRespondents
With
31
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
L.P.A. No. 544 of 2024
1. Sefali Kumari, aged about 33 years, daughter of Kamakhya Prasad
Khandwal, resident of village Kharsawan (Bazarsai), P.O. & P.S.
Kharsawan,District - Saraikela Kharsawan.
2. Ashok aged about 38 years, son of Kiriti, resident of village
Hathitand, P.O. Dungi, P.S. Seraikella District - Saraikela
Kharsawan.
3. Rupesh Kundu Modak, aged about 31 years, Purnachandra Kundu
Modak, resident of village Saraikela Ward No. 2, Garage Chowk,
P.O. & P.S. Saraikela, District - Saraikela Kharsawan.
4. Kailash Chandra Mahali, aged about 40 years, son of Ghasi Ram
Mahali, resident of village Kashidih, P.O. Kashidih, P.S. Chowka,
District Saraikela Kharsawan.
5. Chittaranjan Mahato, aged about 34 years, son of Lal Mohan
Mahato, resident of village Karmadih (Bistatand), P.O. Soro, P.S.
Ichagarh, District Saraikela Kharsawan.
6. Usha Kumari, aged about 31 years, daughter of Rathindra Nath
Machhuya, resident of Chandil Station Basi, P.O. - Tonkocha, P.S.
Nimdih, District Saraikela Kharsawan.
7. Deepak Kumar Pradhan, aged about 38 years, son of Rudra
Charan Pradhan, resident of village Kudaisingi, P.O. Amda, P.S.
Kharsawan, Distirct - Saraikela Kharsawan
... Appellants/Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Ministry Rural
Development (Panchayati Raj), Ranchi, Government of Jharkhand
having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.
Jagannathour, District - Ranchi.
2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj & NREP (Special Division
32
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Department) Governemnt of Jharkhand, having its office at
Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.. Jagannathour, District Ranchi
3. The Director, Panchayati Raj, Directorate of Panchayati Raj,
Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Jagannathour, District - Ranchi.
4. The Deputy Commissioner, Seraikela Kharsawan having its office
at Collectorate Building, Seraikela, P.O. & P.S. Seraikela, District
Seraikela Kharsawan.
5. The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad Campus, Sernikele Kharsawan, P.O. & P.S.
Garhwa, District Seraikela Kharsawan.
6. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka having its office at Collectorate
Building, Dumka, P.O. & P.S. Dumka, District - Dumka.
7. The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, Garhwa, P.O. & P.S. Garhwa District - Dumka.
.... Respondents/Respondents
8. Shambhu Mahato, aged about 33 years, son of Baidhya Nath
Mahato, resident of 32, Chitragupt, Bara Gamhariya, P.O. & P.S.
Gamhariya, District -Seraikela Kharsawan.
9. Deepesh Kumar Rath @ Deepesh Rath, aged about 33 years, son
of Anup Kumar Rath, resident of Ward No.-3 (Old) Serraikela, P.O.
& P.S. Seraikela, District Seraikela, Kharsawan
10. Dinesh Soren, aged about 33 years, son of Bangal Soren, resident
of village - Pratappur, P.O. Dugdha, P.S. Gamhariya, District -
Seraikela Kharsawan.
11. Sukhdeo Mahato, aged about 33 years, son of Shiva Mahato,
resident of village - Sindri, P.O. Sindri, P.S. - Seraikela, District -
Seraikela Kharsawan.
12. Satyam Kumar Anand, aged about 33 years, son of Pradeep
33
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Kumar Sinha, resident of village - Dudhani, P.O. - Dumka, P.S.
Dumka, District- Dumka, Kharsawan.
13. Kapil Karn, aged about 34 years, son of Vijay Kumar Mandal,
resident of village - Jarmundi, P.O. & P.S. -Jarmundi, District -
Dumka.
14. Manoj Kumar Tudu, aged about 31 years, son of Dewan Tudu,
resident of village Ghoribad, P.O. & P.S. Jama, District - Dumka.
15. Sidharth Shankar, aged about 28 years, son of Anand Shankar,
resident of village - Hansdiha, P.O. & P.S. - Hansdiha, District -
Dumka.
16. Ramlal Das, aged about 27 years, son of Chandrakant Das,
resident of Birajpur, P.O. Lilatari, P.S. Jama, District - Dumka.
17. Sonot Soren, aged about 32 years, son of Sanatan Soren, resident
of village. Gujisimal, P.O. & P.S., Shikaripara, District - Dumka
18. Mathias Hembrom, aged about 32 years, son of Late Baburam
Hembrom, resident of village Ghasipur, P.O. Ghasipur, P.S. -
Dumka, Disrict - Dumka.
19. Samresh Hembrom @ Saresh Kumar Hembrom, aged about 38
years, resident of village Kusumdih, P.O. Asansol Kurwa, P.S.
Dumka, District Dumka.
20. Sunil Soren, aged about 28 years, son of Kanhai SOren, resident of
village Simalduma, P.O. Ramgarh, P.S. - Ramgarh, District -
Dumka.
... Petitioners/ Proforma Respondents
With
L.P.A. No. 547 of 2024
1. Samir Kumar Giri, aged about 39 years, son of Bimalendu Giri,
resident of village Bil Dubrajpur, P.O. Kaimi, P.S. Bahragora,
District- East Singhbhum
34
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
2. Kashinath Shit, aged about 30 years, son of Kamal Kumar Shit,
resident of Mohanpur, P.O. & P.S. Bahragora, District- East
Singhbhum.
3. Sourav Kumar Barik, aged about 29 years, son of Sasanka Shekhar
Barik, resident of Ulidih Tank Road, P.O. & P.S. Mango, District East
Singhbhum.
4. Narayan Chandra Hansda, aged about 41 years, son of Mangal
Hansda, resident of village Dhobani, Dungridih, P.O. & P.S..
Musabani, District East Singhbhum
5. Amit Bera, Aged about 30 years, son of Tapan Bera, Resident of
village Winala, P.O. & P.S. Bahragora, Dist- East Singhbhum.
6. Satya Narayan Jana, aged about 35 years, son of Mangobinda Jana,
Resident of Uinala, P.O. & P.S.-Bahragora, Dist- East Singhbhum.
7. Tarun Kumar Shaw, aged about 38 years, son of Ashok Kumar
Shaw, resident of village Chhota Purualiya, P.Ο. Chhota Paruliya,
P.S. Barsole, District - East Singhbhum.
8. Vidya Bhushan Vidyarthi, aged about 41 years, son of Sadhu
Sharan Prasad, resident of Kalyan Vihar, Ν.Η. 33, P.O. & P.S. M.G.M,
District East Singhbhum.
9. Bishnu Pada Mahato, aged about 37 years, son of Laxmi Charan
Mahato, resident of village - Hatiadih, P.O. Barachirka, P.S. Boram,
District East Singhbhum.
10. Subrata Kumar Ghosh, aged about 41 years, son of Santosh Kumar
Ghose, resident of village - Bhaluk Khulia, P.O. Baragaria, P.S.
Baharagora, District -East Singhbhum.
11. Soumen Kumar Mandal, aged about 36 years, son of Lakshmi
Kanta Mandal, resident of 40 Jamda, P.O. Bhalki, P.S.. Jamshedpur,
District East Singhbhum
12. Bhimsen Puran, aged about 33 years, son of Nageshwar Puran,
resident of village Raipur, P.O. - Raipur, P.S. Raipur, District - East
35
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Singhbhum.
13. Dhananjay Gope, aged about 37 years, son of Ranjeet Gope,
resident of House No. 73, Bango (Potka), P.O. -Potka, P.S. Potka,
District - East Singhbhum.
14. Soma Sawaiyan, aged about 38 years, son of Samu Sawaiyan,
resident of Parsudih Christian Basti, Near St. Robort High School,
Parsudih, P.O. - Tatanagar, P.S. Tatanagar District - East
Singhbhum.
15. Raj Kumar Kunkal, aged about 31 years, son of Vishnu Kunkal,
resident of House No. 92, Tupudang, P.O. Sarjamda, P.S. Parsudih,
Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum.
... Appellants/Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Ministry Rural
Development (Panchayati Raj), Ranchi, Government of Jharkhand
having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S
Jagannathpur, District Ranchi.
2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj & NREP (Special Division
Department) Governemnt of Jharkhand having its office at Project
Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi
3. The Director, Panchayati Raj, Directorate of Panchayati Raj,
Governemnt of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Jagannathpur, District - Ranchi.
4. The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum having its office at
Collectorate Building, East Singhbhum, P.O. & P.S. Jamshedpur,
District East Singhbhum.
5. The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Zila Parishad, P.O. & P.S. -Jamshedpur, District - East
Singhbhum.
36
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
.. ... Respondents/Respondents
6. Abhijeet Bera, aged about 32 years, son of Tarapada Bera,
resident of village - Kesharda, P.O. Kesharda, P.S. - Baharagora,
District - East Singhbhum.
7. Anupam Sahu, aged about 33 years, son of Bimalendu Sahu,
resident of village Angarpara, P.O. - Angarpara, P.S. Gudabanda,
District - East Singhbhum.
8. Amaresh Pati, aged about 30 years, son of Ashok Kumar Pati,
resident of village Nischintpur, P.O. & P.S. - Dumuria, District - East
Singhbhum.
9. Sudhir Kumar Hansda, aged about 32 years, son of Karan Hansda,
resident of village Rerua, P.O. Mura Thakura, P.S. Gurabanda,
District East Singhbhum.
10. Manik Chandra Shit, aged about 32 years, son of Santosh Kumar
Shit, resident of near P.H.Ed. Office, Gopalpur, P.O. & P.S. Ghatshila,
District East Singhbhum.
11. Sujan Paul, aged about 36 years, son of Bishnu Pada Paul, resident
of Uinala, P.O. & P.S. Bahragora, District - East Singhbhum.
12. Hitesh Mahato, aged about 35 years, son of Harendra Nath
Mahato, resident of village Sandpura, P.Ο. Bhalukbinda, P.S.
Chakulia, District East Singhbhum.
13. Bishwajit Pradhan, aged about 41 years, son of Satyendra
Pradhan, resident of village Gamaria, P.O. Gamaria, P.S. Bahragora,
District East Singhbhum.
14. Suraj Kumar Roy, aged about 32 years, son of Pradeep Kumar Roy,
resident of Narsingh Garh, Dhalbhumgarh, P.O. & P.S-
Dhalbhumgarh, District - East Singhbhum
15. Sanjit Kumar Rana, aged about 32 years, son of Ghasiram Rana,
resident of village Bahulia, P.O. & P.S. Chitreshwar, District - East
Singhbhum.
37
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
16. Bishwanath Patar, aged about 45 years, son of Arjun Patar,
resident of village-Badia, House No. 116, Near Sundar Nagar
School, P.O. & P.S. Musabani, District - East Singhbhum
17. Manisha Kumari, aged about 38 years, daughter of Sita Ram
Rawani, resident of House No. 115, Raj Estate, P.O. & P.S.-
Ghatshila, District East Singhbhum.
18. Shammi Tigga, aged about 37 years, son of Late Jaymasih Tigga,
resident of House No. 124, Road, No. 6, Jawahar Nagar, Mango, P.O.
Azad Nagar, P.S. Mango, District - East Singhbhum.
19. Shani Bhushan Singh, aged about 36 years, son of Rishideo Prasad
Singh, resident of Ambedkar Nagar, Harhar Guttu, P.O. Harhar
Guttu, P.S. - Bagbera, District - East Singhbhum.
20. Ajay Kumar Mandal, aged about 33 years, son of Bikash Kumar
Mandal, resident of House No. 1, Mahuldiha, Potka, P.O. Tangrain,
P.S. Potka, Jamshedpur, District - East Singhbhum.
21. Sujit Kumar Rana, aged about 34 years, son of Ghasi Ram Rana,
resident of village - Bahalia, P.O. Chitreshwar, P.S. -Barsol, District
East Singhbhum.
... Petitioners/Proforma Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate
Mr. Yogendra Yadav, Advocate
For the Resp.-UOI : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate (in all cases)
Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, SC-IV
[L.P.A. No. 485 of 2024 & L.P.A. No. 547 of 2024]
Mr. J.F. Toppo, GA-V [L.P.A. No. 544 of 2024]
For the Resp.-Zila
Parishad, Chaibasa : Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Advocate
------
CAV on: 15 April, 2025
th Pronounced on 28 /04/2025
Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.:
1. All the appeals are since arising out of the common order and as
38
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
such directed to be heard together and accordingly listed together
for its analogous hearing.
2. The matter has been heard together with the consent of the learned
counsel appearing for the parties.
3. All the appeals are under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent Appeal
directed against the common order dated 18.06.2024 passed by
learned Single Judge of this Court in writ petition being W.P.(S) No.
1164 of 2021 with W.P.(S) No. 2892 of 2021 and W.P.(S) No. 3542 of
2021, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for consideration of
continuation in service of the writ petitioners-appellants has been
denied by dismissing the writ petitions.
4. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading are that under the
aegis of 14th Finance Commission launched by the Government of
India, the Government of Jharkhand in its Department of Rural
Development (Panchayati Raj), sanctioned various posts of Accounts
Clerk-cum Computer Operator, Junior Engineers, Assistant Engineers
and Executive Engineers. By notification contained in Memo No. 80
dated 28.4.2016, the State Government laid down the requisite
qualifications for appointment and examination process as well as
service conditions. Thereafter, the concerned Deputy Commissioners
of the district issued a press release on 30.5.2016 inviting
applications for the posts of Junior Engineers / Accounts Clerk-cum-
Computer Operator. Similar advertisements for appointment on
various posts were also published by other districts of the State.
Being eligible in all respects, the petitioners applied for appointment
on the post of Junior Engineers / Accounts Clerk-cum Computer
Operators. All the petitioners were called for efficiency test and
computer test and after being found successful in all the tests, they
were appointed on the post of Junior Engineers / Accounts Clerk-
cum-Computer Operators. Thereafter, all the petitioners were posted
in different blocks and were discharging their duties with full
satisfaction of the authorities. It is specific case of the petitioners
39
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
that though they were appointed under the 14th Finance
Commission for a period of five years, which was supposed to come
to an end on 31.03.2020, but their services were extended till
31.12.2020 with assurance that they shall further be continued.
However, the State Government vide notification dated 19.2.2021
initiated fresh selection process on the posts against which the
petitioners are continuing on contractual basis for implementation,
monitoring and execution of the works related to scheme under 15th
Finance Commission on same set of eligibility criterion. Hence, the
petitioners were constrained to knock the door of this Court with
utmost apprehension that their services might be discontinued.
5. It is evident from the factual aspect, as per the pleading made as
referred hereinabove, is that the appellants had been appointed as
Junior Engineers/Accounts Clerk-cum-Computer Operators, on
contractual basis, on the basis of the decision taken in the 14th
Finance Commission.
6. The appellants had started discharging their duties, based upon the
contract entered in between the employer, the state functionary and
the one or the other appellants.
7. After expiry of the tenure of the 14th Finance Commission, which was
replaced by 15th Finance Commission the services of the appellants
were not continued, rather an advertisement has been floated to
engage another appointee, however, the appellants had been granted
an opportunity to participate in the process of selection in terms of
the aforesaid advertisement, but they have not been selected finally.
Hence, they have raised the grievance by filing writ petitions.
8. The learned writ court has considered the issues. The State has filed
counter-affidavit and on consideration of the stand, inter alia, taken
in the counter-affidavit to the effect that there cannot be any
continuation in service once the tenure of the 14th Finance
Commission has expired and replaced by 15th Finance Commission
40
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
wherein so many changes have been brought, particularly the
number of appointees which have been remarkably reduced.
9. The ground has also been taken that the appointment being
contractual in nature which was in subsistence only during the
subsistence period of the 14th Finance Commission at the moment
the period of 14th Finance Commission has ended, the appointment
so made on the basis of 14th Finance Commission, will have to go in
terms of the contract.
10. The learned Single Judge has considered the stand, inter alia, taken
by the State in the counter-affidavit and particularly considering the
nature of the appointment which is contractual in nature has
dismissed the writ petitions against which the present appeals.
Submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the
appellants:
11. Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants
has taken the following grounds:
(i) The learned Single Judge has not appreciated the fact that the
appellants are having the eligibility criteria having the
educational qualification which has been year-marked for
selecting the persons concerned in different capacity and as
such they ought to have been continued even in the period of
15th Finance Commission on the principle that if they are
eligible to hold the post, the contractual appointment cannot be
allowed to be replaced by another set of contractual
appointment.
(ii) The ground has been taken that the learned Single Judge ought
to have taken into consideration that the appellants have
discharged their duties to the utmost satisfaction of the
employer having no complaint from any quarter and as such it
is very harsh for the appellants to go out of service and in their41
2025:JHHC:12547-DBplace, the new set of appointees have been considered.
(iii) The ground has also been raised that the learned Single Judge
has not appreciated the fact in right perspective rather has
taken the issue on the pretext of the appointment said to be
contractual in nature but the appointment cannot be said to be
contractual in nature rather the case of the appellant all along
was before the learned writ court that the contract was based
upon the policy decision as contained in 14th Finance
Commission and the same has been carried over to the 15th
Finance Commission having made no change in the educational
qualification or any eligibility criteria. Hence, dispensing with
the services of the present appellants by replacing them
through new set of appointees is contrary to the principle that
one ad hoc arrangement is not allowed to be replaced by
another ad hoc appointees.
(iv) The learned counsel has submitted that to fortify the aforesaid
argument as has been settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of State of Haryana and Ors. V. Piara Singh and Ors.,
(1992) 4 SCC 118 has been relied, but the same has not been
considered by the learned writ court in right perspective
holding therein that the judgment rendered in the case of State
of Haryana and Ors. V. Piara Singh and Ors. (supra) is not
applicable in view of the fact that the appointment of the
appellants is not contractual, rather the contract is based upon
the 14th Finance Commission and the moment the 14th Finance
Commission has been replaced by another Finance
Commission, the principle applicable for replacing the ad hoc
arrangement cannot be said to be applicable.
12. The learned Senior Counsel, based upon the aforesaid submission,
has submitted that therefore it is a fit case where the impugned
order needs to be interfered with.
42
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the
respondents:
13. While on the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents, while defending the impugned order, has taken the
following grounds:
(i) The learned Single Judge has not erred in passing the
impugned order due to the reason that the appointment
cannot be said to be ad hoc, rather it is contractual and as such
the contractual appointment is to be based upon the terms and
conditions of the contract which is valid only for the period of
one year and after expiry of the period of one year, the force of
the contract will automatically go and in view thereof, even
after coming into effect of 15th Finance Commission, the
appellants will have no right to claim their services by getting
a direction from the High Court to enter into the contract.
(ii) The High Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
is not to command the State to enter into a contract since it is
the domain of the State to enter into a contract with another
party and there cannot be any command for the aforesaid
purpose. Therefore, the submission has been made that the
learned Single Judge has appreciated the aforesaid legal issues
and by considering the scope of Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, the writ petitions have been dismissed which
therefore has got no error.
(iii) The case of the appellants cannot be said to be of ad hoc
appointees, rather it is appointment made on contract which
was during the course of the 14th Finance Commission and the
moment when the period of 14th Finance Commission has
expired, the contract will also be of no existence in the eye of
law.
(iv) The appellants had appeared in the process of selection on the
43
2025:JHHC:12547-DBbasis of advertisement wherein the specific consideration has
been given by giving relaxation in age of such appointees who
have worked in the tenure of the 14th Finance Commission as
also the benefit of experience has also been decided to be
given to the extent of 30 per cent, but the appellants herein
have not been selected in the process of selection and hence it
cannot be said that any prejudice has been caused to the
appellants, rather, it is a case wherein the appellants have not
found to be selected due to their performance since they have
came below in the merit list than the other selected
candidates.
14. The learned counsel, based upon the aforesaid, has submitted that
the learned Single Judge has considered all these aspects of the
matter and as such, the same cannot be said to be suffer from any
error.
Analysis:
15. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, gone
through the pleadings made in the petition as also the finding
recorded by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order.
16. This Court needs to refer herein the admitted facts that the
appellants have been appointed on contractual basis based upon the
terms and conditions of the contract which was valid for a period of
one year during the subsistence period of 14th Finance Commission.
17. The appellants, after being appointed, have started discharging their
duties. The tenure of the 14th Finance Commission was replaced by
15th Finance Commission.
18. After the end of the tenure of 14th Finance Commission, the service
of the appellants has been rescinded due to rescinding of the
contract. When the 15th Finance Commission has come, the State
Government has come out with the advertisement being
44
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
Advertisement No. 01/2021 to fill up the vacancies of 20 Junior
Engineers and 39 Accounts Clerk-cum-Computer Operators. The
number of vacancies which were being held by the appellants, i.e., of
the post of Junior Engineers/Accounts Clerk-cum-Computer
Operators, had been reduced.
19. The advertisement has been floated to fill up the post of 20 Junior
Engineers and 39 Accounts Clerk-cum-Computer Operators. It is
evident from the said advertisement that due care has been given to
consider the candidature of the candidates who were in service
during the course of 14th Finance Commission by giving relaxation of
three years in age. The relevant condition of the advertisement is
being referred herein which reads as under:
(ख) उम्र सीमा :-
कनीय अभियंता के भिए उम्र सीमा अभिकतम 40 वर्ष होगी। उम्र सीमा की गणना 01.01.2021
के आिार पर की जायेगी।
वैसे अभ्यर्थी जिन्हें ग्राम पंचायत ं में 14वें जवत्त आय ग से सं बंजित कायो का अनुभव ह
उन्हें अजिकतम उम्र सीमा में अजिकतम तीन वर्ष की छूट प्रदान की िायेगी।
20. Further, the decision has also been taken to give weightage of 30 per
cent marks on experience head who had performed their duties in
14th Finance Commission. The relevant condition of the
advertisement is being referred herein which reads as under:
(घ) मूल्ांकन :-
(i) अभ्यभथषयों का मूल्ां कन 100 अं कों पर भकया जायेगा, जो भनम्न खण्ों में भविाभजत रहे गा :-
अभनवायष वां भित योग्यता अनु भव भवर्य ज्ञान योग
शैक्षभणक योग्यता
50 10 30 10 100
(ii) भवर्य ज्ञान संबंिी जााँ च परीक्षा में उत्तीणषता का स्तर 40 प्रभतशत रहे गा याभन 10 में से 4 अंक िाना
अभनवायष होगा।
(iii) चयन की पात्रता हे तु कुि भनिाष ररत 100 अंकों में से सामान्य श्रेणी के उम्मीदवारों को न्यूनतम 50 अंक
एवं अनुसूभचत जाभत एवं अनुसूभचत जन जाभत के उम्मीदवारों को न्यूनतम 40 अंक िाना अभनवायष होगा।
45
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
इससे कम अंक िाने पर चयन हे तु अयोग्य माने जायेंगे।
(iv) अनु भव का तात्पयष है 14th FC में कायष करने का अनु भव। जिसका प्रमाण मानदे य भु गतान
संबंिी जववरणी के आिार पर ह गा।
21. The writ petitioners/appellants in terms of said advertisement had
participated in the process of selection, but they have not been found
to be suitable since they are not come in the merit list even after
giving the benefit of relaxation in age and weightage of 30 per cent
marks. The appellants, being aggrieved with their non-selection, had
approached this Court by filing writ petitions which having been
dismissed, therefore, the present appeals have been filed.
22. The issue which requires consideration herein in the backdrop of the
aforesaid fact is that:
(i) Whether the appellants have got any accrued right for
selection after rescinding of the contract.
(ii) Whether the appellants can claim any positive direction from
this Court once they have been allowed to participate in the
process of selection after giving benefit of relaxation of age
and experience to the extent of 30 per cent marks on the basis
of the service rendered during the course of the 14th Finance
Commission.
23. Both the issues since are interlinked, as such, are being taken
together for its consideration.
24. The law is well-settled that the accrued right will only be available to
such appointees who have been appointed against the substantive
post being protected by the principle as carved out under Article 311
of the Constitution of India.
25. The cases of such appointees, who have been appointed on contract
will have right to hold the post subject to fulfillment of the
conditions as available in contract only during the period of contract.
46
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
26. One or the other persons cannot claim the engagement, as a matter
of right, after expiry of the period of contract, since the contract
binds both the parties and if any condition has been inserted in the
contract, as agreed in between the parties, the same is strictly to be
adhered to any condition contained therein, if allowed to be flouted,
the same to be contrary to the terms and conditions and will amount
to re-writing the terms and conditions of the contract.
27. The aforesaid preposition will be said to be contrary to the settled
position of law, as has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of Union Territory of Pondicherry and Ors Vs. P.V. Suresh and
Ors., (1994) 2 SCC 70 at paragraph 11 wherein it was held that the
Court has no jurisdiction to alter the terms or re-write the contract
between the parties. For ready reference, the said paragraph is being
quoted hereunder:
“11. In the circumstances of this case, our inquiry is limited to the
question whether the contract was so constructed that loss was
inherent and implicit in it; if so, it ought to be modified. Otherwise,
the Court has no jurisdiction to alter the terms or rewrite the
contract between the parties.”
28. Adverting to the factual aspect of the present case, it is admitted case
of the appellants that they had been appointed on contract basis, on
the basis of the advertisement floated in course of 14th Finance
Commission period. One of the conditions of contract was that the
contract will be valid for a period of one year as would be evident
from the condition No. 5(i) of the Advertisement No. 01 of 2016, as
annexed at page 360 of the petition.
29. The contract was during the course of the 14th Finance Commission
period and after expiry of the period of 14th Finance Commission,
the 15th Finance Commission period has come, therefore, the normal
consequence as has been followed was of rescinding the contract
which was entered in between one or the other appellants and the
State functionary.
47
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
30. The State Government, in order to execute the work as was under
the 15th Finance Commission period, has floated advertisement to
fulfil the post of Junior Engineer and Accounts Clerk-cum-Computer
Operator. The number of posts for Accounts Clerk-cum-Computer
Operator has been reduced from 14th Finance Commission to 15th
Finance Commission from 1467 to 869 The arrangement has been
made to give weightage to the candidates who had been engaged
during the course of 14th Finance Commission by giving relaxation in
age and also weightage of 30 per cent marks under the experience
head who had worked during the 14th Finance Commission period.
31. The appellants had applied but having not been declared to be
successful, as such they have not been selected.
32. Since, we are dealing with the issue of contractual engagee, who
after expiry of the period of contract had participated in the process
of selection but had not been selected, in such circumstances, when
the appellants themselves are admitting the legal position of expiry
of period of contract and thereby the validity of their engagement in
terms of the said contract, then how they claim their engagement by
way of accrued right on the basis of the new advertisement which
was floated in course of 15th Finance Commission.
33. The accrued right has been defined and interpreted by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of MGB Gramin Bank v. Chakrawarti Singh
[(2014) 13 SCC 583] at paragraph 11, 12 and 13, which read
hereunder as:
“11. The word “vested” is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary (6th
Edn.) at p. 1563, as:
“Vested.–fixed; accrued; settled; absolute; complete. Having the
character or given in the rights of absolute ownership; not
contingent; not subject to be defeated by a condition precedent.
Rights are ‘vested’ when right to enjoyment, present or
prospective, has become property of some particular person or
persons as present interest; mere expectancy of future benefits, or48
2025:JHHC:12547-DBcontingent interest in property founded on anticipated
continuance of existing laws, does not constitute ‘vested rights’.”
12. In Webster’s Comprehensive Dictionary (International
Edition) at p. 1397, “vested” is defined as law held by a tenure
subject to no contingency; complete; established by law as a
permanent right; vested interest.
13. Thus, vested right is a right independent of any contingency
and it cannot be taken away without consent of the person
concerned. Vested right can arise from contract, statute or by
operation of law. Unless an accrued or vested right has been
derived by a party, the policy decision/scheme could be changed.
34. Further, so far as the question of taking away the vested right is
concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court has laid down the proposition in
the case of Chairman, Railway Board v. C.R. Rangadhamaiah,
(1997) 6 SCC 623 at paragraph-24, which reads hereunder as
follows:–
“24. In many of these decisions the expressions “vested rights” or
“accrued rights” have been used while striking down the impugned
provisions which had been given retrospective operation so as to
have an adverse effect in the matter of promotion, seniority,
substantive appointment, etc., of the employees. The said
expressions have been used in the context of a right flowing under
the relevant rule which was sought to be altered with effect from
an anterior date and thereby taking away the benefits available
under the rule in force at that time. It has been held that such an
amendment having retrospective operation which has the effect of
taking away a benefit already available to the employee under the
existing rule is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of the rights
guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. We are
unable to hold that these decisions are not in consonance with the
decisions in Roshan Lal Tandon [AIR 1967 SC 1889], B.S. Vedera
[AIR 1969 SC 118] and Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni [(1983) 2 SCC
33].”
35. The position of law is well-settled that if an appointment is made on
contractual basis, such contractual engagee is having no right to be
49
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
retained in service if the employer is not willing to extend the
contract.
36. It is also not a case of the appellants that the cases of the appellants
had not been considered, rather, the State Government has
formulated a policy wherein due care has been taken to consider the
candidature of the candidates by giving age relaxation of three years
as also weightage of 30 per cent marks on the experience head of the
period of service which has been rendered by one or the other
appellants during the course of 14th Finance Commission. But the
appellants although had participated in the process of selection in
terms of the new advertisement but they have not been found to be
meritorious candidates in comparison to that of the others based
upon the merit.
37. The ground which has been agitated by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants that one contractual appointee
cannot be replaced by another and to that effect, the judgment
rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and
Ors. V. Piara Singh and Ors. (supra) has been relied upon.
38. We have considered the factual aspect of the case of State of
Haryana and Ors. V. Piara Singh and Ors. (supra) wherein the
issue of ad hoc appointment was the subject-matter and in that
context, it has been held that one ad hoc arrangement cannot be
allowed to be replaced by another.
39. Herein, it needs to refer that there is difference in between the ad
hoc and contractual appointment. The ad hoc appointment is known
as the appointment which is purely on the stopgap arrangement. The
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and Ors. V.
Piara Singh and Ors. (supra) while considering the appointment
made on ad hoc basis has considered the nature of appointment
which is without reference to the Public Service Commission or the
Subordinate Selection Board and without adhering to employment
50
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
exchange requirements and were being appointed for a period of six
months or so but were continued for years together under the order
passed from time to time.
40. But the contractual appointment is quite different to that of the ad
hoc appointment since the contractual appointees are to be
governed by the terms and conditions of the contract and there
cannot be any deviation therefrom.
41. However, if the Government thinks it proper, then depending upon
the condition, if available in terms of contract, the period of contract
can be extended.
42. The judgment rendered in the case of State of Haryana and Ors. V.
Piara Singh and Ors. (supra) is having no concern with the issue of
contractual appointment, rather it was related to ad hoc
appointment.
43. This Court, therefore, is of the view that what has been argued by the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants by relying
upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
State of Haryana and Ors. V. Piara Singh and Ors. (supra) is not
applicable in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, since,
we are dealing with the case of contractual engagees and not ad hoc
appointees. Even in the case of ad hoc appointment, there cannot be
any direction by the learned writ court by way of command to grant
extension in service.
44. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the argument to the effect
that one contractual engagement cannot be replaced by another is
having no force in view of the fact that the contractual appointments
always depend upon the terms and conditions of the contract and if
once contract has lost its force, the authority concerned cannot be
restricted to go for another contract.
45. The aforesaid argument is also not sustainable on other count since
51
2025:JHHC:12547-DB
the appellants have been provided an opportunity to participate in
the process of selection for their consideration of candidature in
terms of the condition No. 1 (ख) and 1(घ) (i), (iv) of the
advertisement, but they have not been found to be meritorious in
merit in comparison to others.
46. This Court, based upon the aforesaid discussion, is of the view that
the issue which has been formulated as above are being answered
against the appellants.
47. Adverting to the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge in the
impugned order, this Court, after going through the same, has found
that the learned Single Judge has taken into consideration the nature
of contractual appointment, the effect after the expiry of the period
of contract and the issue of accrued right and thereafter has refused
to pass positive direction in favour of the appellants. Therefore, this
Court is of the view that the impugned order cannot be said to suffer
from any error, as such, the instant appeals deserve to be dismissed.
48. Accordingly, all the instant appeals are hereby dismissed.
49. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
I agree,
(Rajesh Kumar, J.) (Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated: 28 /04/2025
Saurabh/Samarth
A.F.R.
52