2026:JHHC:15261 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 2760 of 2025 ….….. 1. Ram Niwasan, Age- 57 yrs, S/o- Late B.P Singh, r/o- Janki Kutir, Sukhdeo Nagar, P.O- Hehal, P.S- Sukhdeonagar, Hehal, District Ranchi-834005. 2. Binod Kumar Singh, Age-59 yrs, S/O- Late K. N. Singh, r/o Angan Apartment, Hehal, P.O- Hehal, P.S- Sukhdeonagar, Hehal, District Ranchi-834005. 3. Arwind Kumar Sinha, Age- 52 yrs S/o Sri Mathura Prasad, r/o 2/36, New Area Gandhi Nagar, Hinoo, PO.+PS. Doranda, District Ranchi-834002. 4. Arvind Kumar, Age 45 yrs, S/o- Late Satyanand Singh, r/o-Sumangli, Near Narayan Home, Dipatoli, PO. +PS. Bariyatu, District Ranchi 834009. 5. Ram Nath Pradhan, Age 58 yrs, S/o- Late Lalit Pradhan, r/o-Mukchund Toli, Chutia, PO. +PS. Chutia, District Ranchi. 6. Chhedi Gahlot, Age 56 Yrs, S/o- Sri Jagdeo Gahlot, r/o- Qt. no. 2341, Sec 8C, Bokaro Steel City PO- Sec 9, PS- Harla, District Bokaro-827009. 7. Anuj Kumar Sharan, Age 60 yrs, S/o- Lt. L. T. Sharan, r/o-New Area, Sarvodaya Nagar, Jail Hata, PO- Daltenganj, PS-Daltonganj Sadar, District Palamau 822101 …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary Agriculture, Animal Husbandry & Co-operative Department, Govt. of Jharkhand having its office at Ground floor, Enginerring House, Near Colchakkar Dhurwa, P.O.+P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Principal Secretary, Planning cum Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O.+P.S. Dhurwa, Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Registrar, Registrar of Cooperative Societies, having office at Pashupalan Bhawan, Third and Fourth Floor, Khunti, Road, Hesag, P.O.+P.S. Hatia, Ranchi, Jharkhand-834003. ..... Respondent(s) ….….. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ….… For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate For the Resp.-State: Mr. O.P. Tiwari, G.P.-III ….….. C.A.V. ON: 05/05/2026 PRONOUNCED ON:15/05/2026 2026:JHHC:15261 2 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners who are presently holding the post of Co- operative Extension Officers in the Agriculture, Animal Husbandry & Co-operative Department, Government of Jharkhand. They have prayed for a mandamus to increase their pay from grade pay of GP 4200 (Level-6) to the grade pay of GP 4600 (Level-7). 3. Briefly stated, the petitioner no.1 was appointed in the year 1997, petitioner no.2 in the year 2000, petitioner no.5 in the year 1996, petitioner no.6 in the year 2000 and petitioner no.7 in the year 1989 itself. All these petitioners 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 were appointed in the undivided State of Bihar. As far as petitioner no.3 and 4 are concerned; they were appointed in the year 2011, after the Jharkhand State came into being. Petitioners are in the supervisory/inspectorial level. Their examinations were conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission for those who were appointed in the undivided State of Bihar and by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission for those who were appointed post bifurcation. 4. The case of the petitioners is that by Resolution No.3590 dated 24.05.2017, the State of Bihar has 2026:JHHC:15261 3 enhanced the pay scale of Co-operative Extension Officers. The pay of Co-operative Extension Officers in Bihar has been increased to grade pay of GP 4600 (Level- 7) with effect from 01.01.2016. Even the Ministry of Finance Government of India has upgraded the pay scale of supervisory/inspectorial cadre to GP 4600 (Level-7). The Resolution whereby the State of Bihar has enhanced the grade pay of Co-operative Extension Officers has been placed at Annexure-3 of the writ petition. 5. Petitioners have pleaded that since in the 7th Central Pay Commission the Central Government enhanced the grade pay of supervisory/inspectorial cadre to GP 4600 in Level-7, the State of Bihar has followed the same and granted the benefits of such pay scale to Co-operative Extension Officers in the line with the policy of the Central Government. 6. It has further been pleaded that there were some pay anomalies with respect to Panchayat Secretaries in the State of Jharkhand viz-a-viz State of Bihar. The Panchayat Secretaries brought such fact to the notice of the Government of Jharkhand with a request that their ACP benefits be extended in tune with what was given by the State of Bihar to Panchayat Secretaries. Such request of Panchayat Secretaries was acceded to by the 2026:JHHC:15261 4 Government of Jharkhand and they were put at par with those who are posted in the State of Bihar. 7. Per contra, the case of respondents, as pleaded in the counter affidavit, is that Jharkhand is an independent State and as such Jharkhand Government is not bound by what was done in the State of Bihar. Specific stand has been taken in paragraphs no.8, 9 and 10 that merely because the State of Bihar has enhanced the pay scale, that does not mean that the State of Jharkhand shall also follow the same. 8. Mr. Manoj Tandon learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that since the Central Government has enhanced the pay scale of supervisory/inspectorial cadre from grade pay of 4200 (Level-6) to the grade pay of GP 4600 (Level-7), the State of Jharkhand is also duty bound to follow the same. It has been further submitted by learned counsel that strictly in tune with the policy of the Central Government, the State of Bihar has also enhanced the grade pay of Co-operative Extension Officers from GP 4200 (Level-6) to GP 4600 (Level-7) and hence the petitioners also deserve the same benefits. 9. Learned Counsel has pointed out that out of 7 petitioners, 5 were appointed in the undivided State of Bihar. Had there been no bifurcation of the State, the 2026:JHHC:15261 5 petitioners would have got the same benefits and pay scale as was granted to those who are now working in the successor State of Bihar. He, therefore, submits that the aims and objects of the Bihar Re-organization Act, 2000 is that there should not be any discrimination between those who were either allocated to Jharkhand or Bihar because of bifurcation of the State. 10. Mr. Tandon, further submits that the decision of the State Government not to enhance the pay scale in tune with the State of Bihar is detrimental to the interest of the petitioner that too without the approval of the Central Government. Such decision runs contrary to the provisions enshrined in Bihar Re-organization Act, 2000. It has been submitted that the stand taken in the counter affidavit by the respondent-State is contrary to Annexure-4 of the writ petition; whereby and whereunder paragraphs no.6 of the Resolution dated 07th January, 2014, the State of Jharkhand has taken a decision to follow the decision of the State of Bihar with respect to grant of the benefits of Assured Career Progression Scheme to Panchayat Secretaries. 11. It is therefore, submitted by the Counsel for the petitioners that in one case the Jharkhand Government 2026:JHHC:15261 6 has followed the decisions of State of Bihar and in this present case, the stand has been taken that Jharkhand is an independent State so it is not bound by the decision of the State of Bihar. It is, therefore, submitted that for these reasons the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 12. Mr. O.P. Tiwari, learned Counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand has supported the statement made in the counter affidavit on the ground that Jharkhand is an independent State and Jharkhand Government is not bound by the decision taken by the State of Bihar. He has further submitted that the Central Government has taken the decision in the facts and circumstances of a particular case and the same may not be binding upon the State of Jharkhand. 13. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the averments made in the respective affidavits and the documents annexed therein; it appears that the facts of the case are not in dispute. It has not been disputed by the respondents that out of 7 petitioners, Petitioners No.1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 were appointed in the undivided State of Bihar. Only 2 petitioners, namely, Petitioners No.3 and 4 were appointed after bifurcation of the State. Faced with the situation, this Court holds that since the State of Bihar has enhanced 2026:JHHC:15261 7 the pay of Co-operative Extension Officers from grade pay of GP 4200 (Level-6) to grade pay of GP 4600 with Level- 7, the State of Jharkhand should also follow the same principle. 14. It is true, as submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondents, that the State of Jharkhand is an independent State. But the question is when maximum of these petitioners was appointed in the undivided State of Bihar, why the petitioners would be deprived of such legitimate expectation. Had there been no bifurcation of the State, these petitioners would have also got the same benefits, as has been given to those who are now working in the Successor State of Jharkhand. 15. This Court, therefore, holds that it is a clear-cut case of a decision being taken detrimental to the interest of these petitioners merely because of bifurcation of the State. The bifurcation of the State may not visit with these petitioners with such civil consequences that they will get lesser amount of pay and those who have been allowed to remain in the successor State of Bihar would get more pay. 16. Not only this, the Central Government has taken a decision with respect to supervisory/inspectorial cadre 2026:JHHC:15261 8 and their pay has been enhanced from grade pay of GP 4200 (Level-6) to GP 4600 Level-7. The State of Bihar has just followed what was decided by the Central Government with respect to supervisory/ inspectorial post. So, if the decision was taken by the State of Bihar in tune with the Central Government; the State of Jharkhand is also duty bound to accept the same and on the same principle, the pay of the petitioners is also required to be enhanced from grade pay of GP 4200 (Level-6) to grade pay of GP 4600 (Level-7). 17. As has rightly been pointed out that though in the counter affidavit stand has been taken that the State of Jharkhand is not bound by the decision of State of Bihar, but the fact remains that Annexure-4 is a Resolution dated 07th January, 2014; whereby the Finance Department of the State of Jharkhand itself has taken the decision strictly in tune with what was decided by the State of Bihar. 18. It has specifically been stated in this Resolution that since the State of Bihar has enhanced and granted a particular pay scale to Panchayat Secretaries; such pay should be paid to the Panchayat Secretaries posted in the State of Jharkhand also. Therefore, this Court holds that such principle can 2026:JHHC:15261 9 be applied in the case of the petitioners also. The contrary stand taken by the State of Jharkhand is nothing but an unfair, unreasonable decision and amounts to abuse of bureaucratic power. 19. In the light of what has been held above, this Court directs respondents to enhance the pay scale/grade pay of the petitioners from GP 4200 (Level-6) to GP 4600 (Level-7). The respondent-State is directed to issue formal order of such enhancement within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt/production of the copy of this order and extend the consequential benefits within a further period of 4 weeks. 20. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed with no order as to costs. Pending IAs, if any, are closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Dated:15 /05/2026 Amardeep/ A.F.R Uploaded on 22.05.2026