Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40391 (JHR)

VIJAY TOPPO v. THE RANCHI INSTITUTE OF NEURO PSYCHIATRY AND ALLIED SCIENCES (RINPAS) REPRESENTED THRO ITS DIRECTOR

WPC/5947/2025 · 2025-11-06

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:33189 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(S) No.5947 of 2025 ----- Vijay Toppo, son of Bandhan Oraon, resident of village Kanke Semer Tola, PO and PS Kanke, District Ranchi, Jharkhand … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The Ranchi Institute of Neuro Psychiatry and Allied Sciences (RINPAS) represented through its Director, PO and PS Kanke, District Ranchi 2.The Director, Institute of Neuro Psychiatry and Allied Sciences (RINPAS), PO and PS Kanke, District Ranchi … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Md. Azam, Advocate Ms. Aulia Begum, Advocate For the RINPAS : Dr. A. K. Singh, Advocate Mr. Sharan Toppo, Advocate …...... 07 /06.11.2025: In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: “directing the respondents to grant permission to re-marry without holding pension and to take final decision upon application dated 21.12.2024.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as his representation is already pending before the respondents, suffice it would be, if a direction is given to the respondents to consider the prayer of the petitioner and dispose of, if not yet disposed of. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that if the petitioner files a fresh representation before the respondent no.2-the Director, Institute of Neuro Psychiatry and Allied Sciences (RINPAS), the same will be considered and appropriate order will be passed. 4. Considering the submission of the parties, I direct the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no. 2- the Director, Institute of Neuro Psychiatry and Allied Sciences 2025:JHHC:33189 2 (RINPAS) who will consider the case of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order, strictly as per the law and statutory provision. 5. The representation should be filed within four weeks and the decision should be taken within eight weeks thereafter. 6. If the prayer of the petitioner is rejected for any reasons whatsoever the reasons should be communicated to the petitioner within a period of four weeks thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 06.11.2025 Tanuj/CP-2