2025:JHHC:33163 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 3674 of 2019 Pramod Kumar, aged about 37 years, son of Suresh Ram, resident of Mohalla Ambakoli, Latehar, P.O. Latehar, P.S. Latehar and District Latehar, Jharkhand. ... … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its Office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhruwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 3. Appointment Committee, through its Chairman, Divisional Commissioner, Latehar, P.O. Latehar, P.S. Latehar, District Latehar. 4. Deputy Development Commissioner, Latehar, P.O. Latehar, P.S. Latehar, District Latehar, 5. Commissioner, North Chota Nagpur Division, Hazaribagh officiating from his office at CTS Colony, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ... … Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Madhav Prasad, Advocate Mr. Navneet Sahay, Advocate Ms. Monalisa Singh, Advocate Mr. Parth Jalan, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Raj, AC to AAG-II -------- Order No. 08 /Dated: 6th November 2025 Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner prays to implead, Commissioner, North Chota Nagpur Division, Hazaribagh as party- respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the Respondents does not raise any objection. 3. Accordingly, Commissioner, North Chota Nagpur, Division, Hazaribagh is added as Respondent no.5. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner is directed to make necessary correction in the cause title in course of the day. 5. With the consent of the parties the matter is taken up for hearing today itself. 2025:JHHC:33163 2 6. The instant writ application has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs: “1. That in the instant writ petition the petitioner prays for issuance of appropriate Writ(s) /Order(s) and / or Direction(s) particularly a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of the order as contained in Memo No. 1559 (Annexure-5) dated 16.04.2019, issued by Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, wherein the contract of the petitioner has been terminated by the respondent Authority. AND For issuance of any other appropriate Writ / Order / Direction particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondent to reinstate the petitioner on to the post of Assistant Engineer after the impugned order of termination of the contract contained in Memo No. 1559 dated 16.04.2019 is quashed. AND/OR For issuance of any other appropriate Writ / Order / Direction for doing conscionable justice to the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of this case.” 7. In the course of proceeding, several affidavits were filed by the rival parties; however, in the supplementary affidavit dated 12.01.2022 the Petitioner gave reference of a similarly situated employee whose case was same and similar to this Petitioner and after his termination from service, he was subsequently reinstated. As such, learned counsel submits that similar treatment may be given to this Petitioner also. For brevity paragraph nos. 5 and 6 of the supplementary affidavit dated 12.01.2022 are extracted hereinbelow: “5. That it is stated by the Petitioner that in a parallel proceeding initiated against Sunil Kumar Sant, Rojgar Sevak, MGNREGA vide Memo bearing no. 22 dated 11.08.2017 issued by Deputy Development Commissioner, Giridih, wherein service of the said Sri Sunil Kumar Sant was terminated by the said authority on similar grounds. 6. That it is further stated by the Petitioner that the said Sunil Kumar Sant filed an appeal bearing MGNREGA Appeal No. 124/2019 before Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh against the order bearing Memo No. 22 dated 11.08.2017 issued by Deputy Development Commissioner, Giridih, wherein the appellant (Sunil Kumar Sant) submitted that in a parallel proceeding initiated against one Shankar Kumar, Block Program Officer, Godda and Anand Prakash Pandey, Assistant Engineer MGNREGA. Both were taken into custody by Anti-Corruption Bureau on the allegation that they were taking bribe. However, they were enlarged on bail and after that they made a Representation before concerned authority. Thereafter, the said authority had allowed them to join the service on the condition that if they were convicted by court, their services will be affected as per Rules. In light of the above factual position, the said Appeal was 2025:JHHC:33163 3 allowed by Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh in favour of Applicant (Sunil Kumar Sant) and held that two separate actions in the same case do not appear to be just and equitable. The case of the petitioner is identical to the case stated in the foregoing paragraph but surprisingly the authorities are subjecting the petitioner to hostile discrimination.” 8. In reply to the aforesaid averments, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent-State submits that the case of similarly situated employee, namely, Sunil Kumar Sant is different, inasmuch as, he had filed an appeal and in appeal, the appellate authority has allowed him to join in service subject to final outcome of criminal case filed against him. However, the Petitioner has not filed any appeal. 9. Having regard to the aforesaid submission and the averments made hereinabove without going into merits of the case, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the Petitioner to approach the newly added Respondent no.5-Commissioner, North Chota Nagpur Division, Hazaribagh along with the documents as early as possible. 10. The moment the Respondent no.5 receives any appeal/representation, he shall take a decision specially in the light of the fact that similarly situated employee, namely, Sunil Kumar Sant has been allowed to join in service subject to final outcome of criminal case. The Commissioner, North Chota Nagpur Division, Hazaribagh shall take the decision within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such Memorandum of appeal/Representation. 11. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 6th November, 2025 Amit Uploaded on 14/11/2025