Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40261 (JHR)

KAUSHALYA DEVI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

C.M.P./694/2025 · 2025-11-14

Ambuj Nath

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:34101 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 694 of 2025 Kaushalya Devi, aged about 47 years, widow of Late Arun Prakash Singh, resident of village Jamgai, P.O. Silam, P.S. Raidih, District Gumla, Jharkhand --- --- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi officiating from Project Bhawan, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Gumla, officiating from Gumla, P.O and P.S. Gumla, District Gumla 4. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Gumla officiating from Gumla, P.O and P.S. Gumla, District Gumla 5. The In-Charge Medical Officer, Community Health Centre, Ghagra, officiating from Ghagra, P.O. Ghagra, P.S. Ghagra, District Gumla 6. The Accountant General (A&E), Jharkhand, Ranchi officiating from the office of the Accountant General, P.O and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi 7. Devanti Devi, age 50 years, W/o Late Arun Prakash Singh, R/o Village Jamgain, P.O. Silam, P.S. Raidih, District Gumla, Jharkhand, at present residing in Shastri Nagar, Gumla --- --- Opp. Parties --- CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath --- For the Petitioner: M/s Nand Kishore Pd. Sinha, Salaluddin Ansari, Advocates For the O.P-State: A.C to G.A-III --- 02 / 14.11.2025 This application has been filed for restoration of W.P.(S) No. 249 of 2022, which was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 28.08.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that another counsel who was engaged to represent the appellant in the writ petition could not appear when the case was called out. He further submitted that the petitioner came to know that his case has been dismissed for non-prosecution from the help desk of this court. He further submitted that the petitioner has good chance to succeed in the writ application and if it is not restored, petitioner would suffer irreparable loss. Learned counsel for the opposite party do not have any objection to prayer made by the petitioner. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on being satisfied with the grounds shown and also in the interest of justice, W.P.(S) No. 249 of 2022 is restored to its original file. C.M.P. is allowed. (Ambuj Nath, J) November 14, 2025 Ranjeet/