IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(S) No.221 of 2017 ----- Nitin Kumar Bhagat … Petitioner(s). Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Ministry of Home and Others … Respondents. With WP(S) No.271 of 2017 ----- Mangra Pahan … Petitioner(s). Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Ministry of Home and Others … Respondents. With WP(S) No.273 of 2017 ----- Maryanush Kerketta … Petitioner(s). Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Ministry of Home and Others … Respondents. With WP(S) No.296 of 2017 ----- Prem Kumar Thakur … Petitioner(s). Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Ministry of Home and Others … Respondents. With WP(S) No.339 of 2017 ----- Sumanjan Mundu … Petitioner(s). Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Ministry of Home and Others … Respondents. CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, AC to SC (L&C)-III …...... 15 /21.01.2025: I.A. No. 2486 of 2021 in W.P.(S) No. 221 of 2017 The petitioner has already been terminated. Since the petitioner has already been terminated there cannot be any order for granting interim protection. 2. This interlocutory application is dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 5289 of 2021 in W.P.(S) No. 221 of 2017 3. The State has already filed counter affidavit. 4. So, I.A. No. 5289 of 2021 has also rendered infructuous. 5. Accordingly, this interlocutory application is dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 519 of 2022 in WP(S) No. 339 of 2017 6. Since the petitioner has already been terminated, no interim order can be passed. 7. Accordingly, I.A. No. 519 of 2022 is dismissed. I.A. No. 2562 of 2021 in WP(S) No. 339 of 2017 8. So far as this interlocutory application is concerned, it would be considered at the time of final disposal. WP(S) Nos. 271 of 2017, 273 of 2017 & 296 of 2017 9. It is an admitted case that the petitioners are not working as they have been terminated. Admittedly they have not worked for continuous period of 10 years on the date of termination. 10. Thus, they cannot be regularized as per the circular or Policy. 11. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. 12. Upon dismissal of the writ petitions, I.A. No. 520 of 2022 in WP(S) Nos. 271 of 2017, I.A. No. 521 of 2022 in WP(S) Nos. 273 of 2017 and I.A. No. 518 of 2022 in WP(S) Nos. 296 of 2017 also stand dismissed. W.P.(S) No. 221 of 2017 with WP(S) No. 339 of 2017 13. List these cases after three weeks under the heading for “Admission”. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/