2025:JHHC:31536 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 5103 of 2017 - 1. Sumita Devi @ Sumita Goswami, W/o. Late Usha Ranjan Goswami. R/o. Raghunathpur, P.O.- Adardih, P.S.- Nimdih, District: Seraikella- Kharswan, Jharkhand 2. Bina Devi, W/o. Sri Chandra Mohan Das, R/o. Raghunathpur, P.O.- Adardih, P.S. Nimdih, District: Seraikella-Kharswan, Jharkhand ..Petitioners Versus 1. State of Jharkhand through the secretary, Home Department, Government of Jharkhand, Doranda, P.O.+P.S.-Doranda, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 2. District Commissioner, Seraikella, P.O., P.S. & District-Seraikella Kharswan 3. Block Development officer, Nimdih, P.O. +P.S.- Nimdih, District:- Seraikella- Kharswan 4. Women extension officer, Nimdih, P.O. +P.S.- Nimdih, District:- Seraikella-Kharswan 5. Block Supply Officer, Nimdih, P.O. + P.S.- Nimdih, District:-Seraikella Kharswan 6. Poonam Rajak, W/o. Not Known to the petitioner, R/o. Raghunathpur, P.O.-Adardih, P.S.- Nimdih, District: Seraikella-Kharswan, Jharkhand 7. Mamta Das, W/o. Not Known to the petitioner, R/o. Raghunathpur, P.O-Adardih, P.S. Nimdih, District: Seraikella-Kharaswan, Jharkhand 8. Surekha Das, W/o. Not Known to the petitioner, R/o. Raghunathpur, P.O.- Adardih, P.S.- Nimdih, District: Seraikella-Kharswan, Jharkhand .Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the Respondents : Divyam, A.C to S.C.-IV -- 08/08.10.2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners praying therein for quashing and setting aside the letter no. 1631 dated 14.12.2016 issued by the 2025:JHHC:31536 2 3rd Respondent, whereby the said respondent has illegally directed the S.D.O, Chandil to make changes in the name of office bearers in the license issued to the Mahila Vikash Samiti, Raghunathpur under Bihar Trade Articles License Unification Order. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners draws attention of this Court towards Annexure-1 which is Rule for giving licence to Self Help Group/Mahila Mandal and submits that the B.D.O has no power to decide or to recommend for removal of any office bearers and any decision with regard to Society is to be taken by the Management Committee. He further draws attention of this Court towards Annexure-2 and submits that without giving any notice to these petitioners and without their presence, a letter has been issued for removing them which is certainly illegal. 4. Learned counsel for the Respondents submits that the tenure for the post of President and Secretary is two years and the instant election relates to 2016; as such, no fruitful purpose would be served to decide this case on merits. 5. Having heard learned counsel parties and after going through the documents available on record, especially Annexure 1 and the impugned letter dated 14.12.2016, it is true that the term of present Secretary has lapsed long before; as such, no fruitful purpose would be served by quashing the letter; however, it is necessary to observe that as per Annexure-1 which is Rules of Self Help Group/Mahila Mandal (Woman Organization), the B.D.O has no power; rather it is the Management Committee, consisting of Secretary and other members, which is having power to take any decision for removal of 2025:JHHC:31536 3 any office bearer as is clear from Clause 6, 7, 8 and 17 of the Rules; as such, in future the Respondent-State should ensure that any action is to be taken strictly in accordance with the Rules which is made for a certain purpose. 6. Having regard to the aforesaid observation/direction, the instant writ application stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 8th October, 2025 Jk Uploaded on 4/11/2025