2025:JHHC:19444 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P(S) No. 2983 of 2025 ---- SUBODH SHANKAR VIDYARTHI, son of Sri Baleshwar Prasad, aged about 52 years, presently posted as Peon, Dairy Development Office, Sahebganj, resident of Near Old S.P. Kothi, Sakrugarh, P.O. & P.S. Sahebganj, District Sahebganj ......Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Co-operative, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. 3. The Director, Dairy Development Directorate, Jharkhand, Farmers Training Centre Campus, Sector-2, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 4. The District Dairy Development Officer, Sahebganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahebganj, District Sahebganj. ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Kr. Prasad, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr. S.C.-I -- 02/14.07.2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The writ petition has been preferred by the Petitioner for the following reliefs: i) For a direction upon the respondents for confirmation of the service of the petitioner who has been working since 01.08.1994 on adhoc basis as Peon after due process of selection and the petitioner is having Service Book, GPF account, regular pay fixation [6th and 7th Pay Revision), similarly situated person namely Tarun Kanta Topno, Veena Gupta, Bal Govind Mahli, Sunil Kumar Rajak, Om Prakash, Judagi Choudhary, Kuber Kushwaha etc. services were confirmed by the Department, pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand from the date of their initial appointment. ii) For a further direction upon the respondents to grant all consequential benefits to petitioner after confirmation of service of the petitioner who has been working as Peon in the Department since 01.08.1994 on adhoc basis. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that though the Petitioner had filed several 2025:JHHC:19444 2 representations before the Respondent, but his representations have not been considered till date; as such, the concerned Respondent may be directed to take a decision on the representations filed by the Petitioner. 4. Ld. counsel for the Respondents submits that since no counter affidavit has been filed and it is the first date of hearing; as such, the Petitioner may be directed to file a fresh representation before the 3rd Respondent. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, this writ petition is hereby disposed of by directing the 3rd Respondent to treat this writ application as representation and take a decision with regard to grievance of this petitioner in accordance with law and applicable Rules and Regulations by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the decision will be in favour of the Petitioner, then the consequential benefits be also extended to the Petitioner within a further period of 8 weeks. The petitioner is directed to serve a copy of this writ petition along with its order to the 3rd Respondent for early disposal of his claim. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of in the manner indicated hereinabove. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Jk