2025:JHHC:21918 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 2577 of 2017 --------- Sunita Kumari, wife of Sri Laxman Kumar Mahto; resident of village- Jamjori, P.O. Gangtakala, P.S. Pathargama, District Godda. ......Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Department of Rural Development (Panchayati Raj), Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi; P.O. & P. S. Ranchi, District - Ranchi. 3. The Director-cum-Special Secretary, Department of Rural Development (Panchayati Raj), Government of Jharkhand; Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Ranchi, District - Ranchi. 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Godda; P.O.-Godda, P.S.-Godda (T), District Godda. 5. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Godda; P.O. - Godda, P.S.- Godda (T), District Godda. 6. The Block Development Officer, Pathargama Block; P.O. & P.S. - Pathargama, District- Godda. 7. Nisha Kumari daughter of Sri Anit Rajak; resident of village Khaira, P.O.- Gangtakala, P.S. Pathrgama, District Godda. .....Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Rahul Saboo, G.P.-II Mr. Abhilash Kumar, A.C. to G.P.-II --------- 11/Dated:-04.08.2025 1. Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for the following reliefs: i. For quashing of the selection letter to the extent only to private respondent no.-7 (Nisha Kumari) to the post of Swayam Sewak (᭭वयं सेवक) of Panchayat Sachiwalaya of Gangtakala Panchayat, under Pathargama Block, District Godda (As contained in Annexure-4), where name of private respondent no.-7 (Nisha Kumari) has been shown at serial no.-71, issued by respondent no. 3 {Director-cum-Special Secretary, Department of Rural Development (Panchayati Raj), Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi}. ii. For further direction upon the state respondents to issue selection 2025:JHHC:21918 2 letter to petitioner to the post of Swayam Sewak (᭭वयं सेवक) to Panchayat Sachiwalaya to Gangtakala Panchayat under Pathargama Block, District - Godda. 3. From the previous orders passed in this case, it appears that notice was issued to respondent No.7 which was duly served upon her way back in the year 2019 itself, however, none appears for respondent No.7. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer on the question that as per his instruction, now the respondent No.7 is not working on the post where she was appointed; as such, the petitioner’s case should be considered sympathetically by the competent authority and give her appointment if she is not otherwise disqualified. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that though a counter affidavit has been filed, but if the information of the petitioner is correct and if at all the post is vacant, she may approach the concerned respondent who shall decide the claim in accordance with law. 6. Having regard to the limited submissions of learned counsels for the parties, the instant application is hereby disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent No.4 as early as possible. The moment respondent No.4 receives such representation; he shall take a decision in the matter and pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. 2025:JHHC:21918 3 7. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of. Pending I.A., if any, also stands closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) vikas/-