Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14088 (JHR)

ANUBHAV KUMAR MALDAHIYAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY

LPA/491/2025 · 2026-01-28

Rajesh Shankar

Original Suitbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:2197-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 491 of 2025 Anubhav Kumar Maldahiyar, aged about-19 years, S/o Late Ajay Kumar, R/o-Near Singhan, Bridge Hazaribagh, P.O. Korrah, P.S.- Muffasil District-Hazaribagh. ... Appellant/Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative reforms and Rajya Bhasa, Government of Jharkhand having its office at project building Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Jaganathpur, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. The Hon'ble Governor through the officer on special duty (judicial) (O.S.D.J.) to governor, state of Jharkhand, Governor's secretarial governor office, (Rajya Bhawan) P.O. +GPO+ PS- Kanke, District- Ranchi Jharkhand. 3. The Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh, through Registrar Sindoor Ichak, Hazaribagh, P.O. – Hazaribagh, P.S. Sadar, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand -825301. 4. The University Law College through the Principal, Vinoba Bhave University, Sindoor Ichak Hazaribagh, P.O.- Hazaribagh, P.S. Sadar, District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand-825301. 5. The Bar Council of India, through its Chairman at 21 rouse avenue instititunal area, New Delhi, P.O. & P.S.- Indraprastha, District- Central Delhi. 110002. 6. The Jharkhand State Bar Council, Jharkhand, Ranchi, through its Chairman, at Bangalow No.5 near Kendriya Vidyalaya, Shyamali Colony Doranda P.O. &. P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi 834002. Jharkhand. ……… Respondents/ Respondents. 7. Mukesh Kumar Yadav, Aged About 22 Years Son Of Mahesh Yadav, R/O Jatra Tola Lodhma Ramgarh Po Ps Dist Ramgarh, 8. Anita Kumari, Aged About 19 Years Daughter Of Lalmani Mahto, Ro Shankardih Po Galagi Ps Nimiyaghat Dist Giridih 9. Rakhi Kumari, Aged 19 Years Daughter Of Punit Mahto, Resident Of Nagri Giridih Po Ps Nagri Dist Giridih 10. Hritik Kumar, Aged About 19 Years, Son Of Krishna Kumar, Ro Sarley Nikash Nagar Hazaribagh Po Korrah Ps Sadar Dist Hazaribagh Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:2197-DB 11. Priyanshu Kumar Singh, Aged About 21 Years Son Of Pravin Kumar, Resident Of Dubbi, PO Narchahi PS Dubi Itkhori Dist Chatra 12. Kalpana Kumari, Aged About 21 Years Daughter Of Yashoda Nandan Sahay, Resident Of Nagwan, Lohandi, Bahera PO Nagwan, PS Nagwan, Dist Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 13. Abhishek Kumar, Aged About 23 Years, Son Of Tunnu Gope, Resident Of Lepo Road Gowaltoli Chowk Hazaribagh PO-Lepo, PS-Lepo, Dist Hazaribagh, Jharkhand-825406 14. Asha Kumari, Aged About 23 Years, C/O Mukesh Mahto, Resident Of Vill Khonathi Nawadih PO & PS Nawadih Dist Dhanbad. 15. Yash Raj Rana, Aged About 33 Years, S/O Yadu Rana, Resident Of Vill Nawada Nawadih Po Ps Banha, Nawada, Dist Hazaribagh. …….. Performa Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR --------- For the Appellants: None For the State: Mr. Yogesh Modi, A.C. to A.A.G.-IA For the University: Mrs. Indrani S. Choudhary, Advocate Miss Ishani Sen, Advocate For the BCI: Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Radha Krishan Gupta, Advocate For the JSBC: Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate --------- 03/Dated: 28.01.2026 1. This appeal challenges the learned Single Judge’s order dated 19.09.2024 dismissing the appellants’ petitions for quashing the notice dated 29.11.2023 issued by the Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh for conducting entrance examination/test on 12.12.2023 for fresh/ revised admission for the session 2022-2025 for LL.B and for sessions 2022-2027 for B.A. LL.B. The appellants/petitioners also prayed that the admissions granted to them in March 2023 for the B.A. LL. B session 2022-2027 be regularised and continued without Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:2197-DB any requirement for them to appear for the Special Entrance Test as declared by notice dated 29.11.2023. 2. None appears for the appellants. However, this appeal was tagged L.P.A. No. 360 of 2025, which, after extensive hearing, we have dismissed today. There is no difference in the subject matter of this appeal and L.P.A. No. 360 of 2025. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents is present in Court. 4. Considering the order made by us today, disposing of L.P.A. No. 360 of 2025, and adopting the reasoning therein, we dismiss this appeal without any order for costs. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) January 28, 2026 N.A.F.R. Manoj/Cp.2 Uploaded on 30.01.2026