2025:JHHC:12647 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 5407 of 2014 ---- Naresh Kumar Suman, s/o. late Gajadhar Mandal at Babu Para (in front of Gayanda Cinema Hall), P.O. and P.S. Dumka, Dist. Dumka, Jharkhand. ..........Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Medical Education, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. 2. State Tuberculosis (TB) Officer, Jharkhand Rural Health Mission Society-TB Control Programme, State TB Cell, JHS Building, RCH Campus, P.O. and P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi. 3. Deputy Commissioner-cum-President, District Tuberculosis Control Program, Dumka, P.O. and P.S. Dumka, District Dumka. 4. District Tuberculosis Officer, District Tuberculosis Centre, Dumka, P.O. and P.S. Dumka, District Dumka. .........Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate Mr. Raj Kishore Sahu, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Zeeshan Ahmad Khan, AC to SC-VII Mr. Zaid Imam, AC to SC-VII ---- 11/28.04.2025 At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his argument on prayer No. 1 (ii) which reads as follows: (ii) Petitioner further prays for issuance of writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions to consider the petitioner for being absorbed as Accountant (Full Time) at District Tuberculosis Centre, Dumka by modifying letter dated 23.08.14 bearing memo no. 363 (Annexure-11) issued by District Tuberculosis Officer, Dumka taking into consideration the representation/ notice (Annexures-9 & 10) by the petitioner and also note at pg. 27 to the Terms of Reference (TOR) for Appointment of Individual Consultants and Contractual Staff (Annexure-8) which provides for continuation and renewal of contract of all existing staff which includes the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of the Court towards supplementary affidavit dated 14.02.2025, wherein he has annexed several orders passed by this Court in the case of similarly situated persons which ultimately culminated in their reinstatement. Learned counsel very fairly submits that instant writ application 2025:JHHC:12647 2 may be disposed of by directing 3rd Respondent to verify the claim of the petitioner in consultation with the 4th Respondent and take a decision. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents though opposed the prayer of the petitioner; however, he fairly submits that till date the claim of the petitioner has not been rejected by any order. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the prayer No. 1(ii) quoted hereinabove, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the petitioner to file fresh representation along with relevant documents and judgments passed by this Court in support of his claim before the 3rd Respondent. The moment the Respondent No. 3 receives the said representation, he shall look into the matter by verifying the records in consultation with the respondent No. 4 and take a decision in the matter by passing reasoned and speaking order, which shall be communicated to the petitioner. 5. Since it is an old matter, the entire exercise shall be done within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. It goes without saying that any monetary benefit, which will accrue pursuant to passing of fresh order, shall be paid to the petitioner within a further period of six weeks. 6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Kunal