Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8833 (JHR)

LILPADO MAHTO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

WPC/3611/2025 · 2025-08-26

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:25366 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.3611 of 2025 ------ 1. Lilpado Mahto, S/o Late Ramjiwan Mahto, R/o Purana Lowadih, Via Samlong, Old Biscuit Factory East, P.O. & P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Parshu Ram Mahto, S/o Late Chaitanya Mahto, R/o 1458/C10/3, Lagan Bari, Lowadih, P.O. & P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. Uma Kant Prasad, S/o Late Chandra Shekhar Prasad, R/o Saket Nagar, P.O. Hinoo, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. Paresh Chandra Adhikari, S/o Late Aditya Kumar Adhikari, R/o Tongri Toli, Harmu, P.O. Harmu, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Department of School Education & Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Director Primary Education, Directorate of School Education & Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Kutchehry, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Respondents ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rishikesh Giri, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, SC-IV ------ 05/ 26.08.2025 Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that in view of issuance of the new Circular, wherein it has been held that if the last date of employment of an employee is 30th June or 31st December, he is entitled to get increment of that period; the petitioners do not want to pursue this writ petition. 2. Considering the aforesaid submission, this writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn. 3. The petitioners should approach respondent No.4 – The District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi. If the petitioners are otherwise entitled for the benefit, the respondent should pay the same in terms of the resolution. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant. Cp-2