2025:JHHC:19732 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P(S) No. 3314 of 2025 ---- Kumari Asha Singh @ Asha Singh Munda, aged about 37 years, Daughter of Prakash Singh, Resident of Kutkut Dungri, Mango, Azad Nagar, P.O.- Azad Nagar, P.S.:-Mango, District- East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand ...Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Director General of Home Guard, having at office at Rajendra Chowk, P.O.& P.S.- Doranda, District- Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner East Singhbhum, having its office at East Singhbhum, P.O.&P.S.- Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum 4. The District Commandant, Home Guard, Jamshedpur, having its office at Jamshedpur, P.O.&P.S.- Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum. ...Respondents --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner : M/s. Manoj Kr. Choubey, Avnish Kumar Pathak, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr. Shashank Saurav, A.C to G.P.-III -- 02/16.07.2025 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 respondent to consider the case of the petitioner by passing reasoned and speaking order on the representation of petitioner dated 17.01.2025 before R-4 (Annexure-2) and allow her for Re-Enrolment (Punah Namankan), in view of notice dated 21.06.2025 (Annexure- 3) as Home Guard. II. To hold and declare that the action of the respondents by not allowing her for Re- enrolment as of Home Guard inspite Representation dated 17.01.2025 before R- 4 ( Annexure-2) and allow her for Re- Enrolment ( Punah Namankan), in view of notice dated 21.06.2025 (Annexure- 3), is wholly illegally and unjust action on the part of respondents No. 3 & 4. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner 2025:JHHC:19732 2 submits that though the Petitioner had filed representation before the Respondent, but her representation has not been considered till date; as such, the concerned Respondent may be directed to take a decision on the representation 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 4th Respondent. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, this writ petition is hereby disposed of by directing the 4th 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. The petitioner is directed to serve a copy of this writ petition along with its order to the 4th Respondent for early disposal of her claim. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of in the manner indicated hereinabove. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Jk