2026:JHHC:3380 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 757 of 2026 ------ Sunita Hembrom, aged about 39 years, daughter of Nangu Hembrom, wife of Pradip Kumar Sinha, Resident of Village- H.No.38, Bada Panchgarh, PO-Sahibganj, PS-Jirwarbari OP., District-Sahebganj. … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Jharkhand, Office at Nepal House, Ranchi, PO & PS-Doranda, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. The Director, Department of Health, Government of Jharkhand, Office at Nepal House, Ranchi, PO & PS-Doranda, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Regional Deputy Director, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka, at PO & PS-Dumka, District-Dumka. 4. The Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman Managing Committee, Sadar Hospital Sahibganj, PO & PS-Sahibganj District-Sahibganj. 5. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer-cum-Secretary, Managing Committee, Sadar Hospital Sahibganj, PO & PS- Sahibganj District-Sahibganj. 6. M/s Shiv Lal, N.G.O., Sadar Hospital, Sahibganj through its Director Mr. Shiv Lal, S/o of not known, Jharna Colony Imli Tola, Sahibganj, PO & PS-Sahibganj District-Sahibganj. … … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Mishra, GP-V Ms. Aditee Dongrawat, AC to GP-V ------ 02/ 09th February, 2026 1. Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner is not the employee of State. Though the petitioner’s place of working is at Sadar Hospital but yet the employer of the petitioner is one M/s Shiv Lal, N.G.O., Sadar Hospital who is a manpower supply agency. 3. The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed to set aside the order of termination and take back the petitioner in service. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner is not an employee of the 2026:JHHC:3380 2 State and M/s Shiv Lal, N.G.O., is a private agency which is not a State within a meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has been removed by the said agency which is a private entity. 5. Thus, this writ petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. 6. A liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 09.02.2026 S.K.D/cp2 Uploaded on 10.02.2026