2026:JHHC:14745 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 2606 of 2026 …… Mahavir Choudhary, Aged about-57 years, son of Late Uday Choudhary, Resident of Central Sounda, P.O.- Bhurkunda, P.S. Patratu, District-Ramgarh (Jharkhand), 829126. …. Petitioner(s) -VERSUS- 1. The Central Coalfields Ltd. through its Chairman-Cum- Managing Director, Ranchi having its office at Coal Bhawan Premise No. 04, MAR, Plot No. AF III, Action area- 1A, Newtown, Rajarhat, P.O. & P.S-Rajarhat, District - Kolkata, West Bengal. 2. The Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Ltd., Ranchi, P.O., G.P.O. & P.S- Kotwali, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The General Manager (P & IR), Central Coalfields Ltd., Ranchi, P.O., G.P.O. & P.S- Kotwali, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Senior Manager, (Personnel) / MP, CCL, Ranchi, P.O., G.P.O. & P.S- Kotwali, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. The General Manager, Central Coalfields Ltd., Barka Sayal Area, Having its office at- Barka Sayal Area, P.O., Sayal & P.S- Bhurkunda, District Ramgarh, Jharkhand. 6. The Deputy General Manager, Central Coalfields Ltd., Barka Sayal Area, Having its office at Barka Sayal Area, P.O., Sayal & P.S- Bhurkunda, District Ramgarh, Jharkhand 7. The Assistant Manager, Central Coalfields Ltd., Barka Sayal Area, Having its office at- Barka Sayal Area, P.O., Sayal & P.S- Bhurkunda, District Ramgarh, Jharkhand 8. The Project Officer, Sayal-D-Project, Urimari, having its office at Sayal-D-Project, P.O.- Sayal & P.S-Bhurkunda, District - Ramgarh, Jharkhand. …..Respondent (s) …… CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishna Prajapati, Adv For the Respondent (s) : Mr. Abhishek Choudhary, Adv …… 2/11.05.2026 A preliminary objection has been raised by learned counsel appearing for respondent-CCL, stating that the petitioner has already filed a writ application, being W.P.(S) No. 5246 of 2021, seeking the same and similar relief, which 2026:JHHC:14745 2 is still pending. However, this writ application has been filed just re-framing the sentence, but for the same and similar prayer. 2. When this Court took cognizance, learned counsel sought permission to withdraw this writ application. 3. By giving a caution to learned counsel for the petitioner, he is allowed to withdraw this writ application. 4. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands dismissed as withdrawn. (Deepak Roshan, J) 11.05.2026 Amardeep/ Uploaded on 26.05.2026