2025:JHHC:13854 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 2276 of 2025 ---------- Chandrabhanu Kumar, aged about 41 years, son of late Ravindra Prasad Yadav, resident of Dwarka City Phase-2, Tilkraidih, P.O. & P.S. Govindpur, Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand. ………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Director General-cum-Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi, having office at Police Headquarters, HEC, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand Armed Police (JAP), having office at Raja Rani Kothi, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand Armed Police (JAP), having office at Raja Rani Kothi, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. The Commandant, Jharkhand Armed Police-09, Sahibganj, Office at Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahibganj, Dist. Sahibganj, Jharkhand. ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. K.K. Singh, SC-V Mr. Krishna Prajapati, AC to SC-V ---------- 02/ 08.05.2025 The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing the part of order dated 23.02.2013 bearing memo No. 265/Sa. Sha (Annexure-3), only to the extent of deletion of the phrase “Administrative Point of View”, as the same has been passed in contravention of the Rule 1212 of the Jharkhand Police Manual and moreover, the said impugned phrase appears to be stigmatic and punitive in nature. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though representation of the petitioner is pending but the respondents have not passed any order on the same. As such, a direction be given to the respondent No. 4 to pass order on his representation. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that since no counter- affidavit has been filed as such, petitioner may be directed to file fresh 2025:JHHC:13854 2 representation before the respondent No. 4 so that his grievance can be redressed. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances and limited submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the 4th Respondent to treat this writ application as representation and take a decision with regard to the claim made by the petitioner in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations, by passing reasoned and speaking order within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petitioner is directed to serve a copy of this writ application to the concerned respondent so that his grievance can be redressed at the earliest. 5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) kunal/-