2026:JHHC:12536 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 2240 of 2026 Uttam Singh, aged about 50 years, son of Uchit Singh, resident of Village Banda, P.O. and P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand) .....Petitioner Veresus 1. Chief Engineer (C), Damodar Valley Corporation, KTPS, Government Industrial Training Institute, Koderma, P.O. and P.S. Koderma, District Koderma. 2. Chairman, Damodar Valley Corporation, KTPS, Main Office Kolkata, DVC Towers, VIP Road, P.O. Kankurgachi, P.S- Ultadanga, Kolkata-700054 (West Bengal) 3. Labour Enforcement Officer, Koderma, P.O., P.S. and District Koderma. 4. Labour Superintendent, Koderma, P.O., P.S. and District Koderma ... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mrs. Sweta Shukla, A.C to AAG-III For the Resp.-DVC : Ms. Khalida Haya Rashmi, Advocate -- 02/23.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for the following reliefs: (i) For a direction upon the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 to make payment of the dues honorarium amount to the petitioner who appointed as a Security Guard in the month of 01st May of 2020 in State Industrial Training Institute, Domchanch, Koderma and perform his duty regularly on the honorarium amount Rs. 15,000/- per month and he performed his duty till October 2024. (ii) To direct the Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4 to pay Rs. 4,70,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. (iii) To direct the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 to give permanent employment to the petitioner as because they have performed their duty as a security guard from 01 May 2020 to October 2024 and now he is working under the contractor. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents are not making payment of honorarium to this petitioner, who was appointed as Security Guard in the month of May, 2020 in State Industrial Training Institute, Domchanch, Koderma and as per his calculation around Rs. 4,70,000/- is due as against the respondent. 2026:JHHC:12536 2 4. The respondents represented by Ms. Khalida Haya Rashmi objected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the same is not maintainable in view of the fact that the petitioner has not represented before the respondent to look into the matter as to whether there is any dues or not. 5. Having regard to the rival submission, the instant writ application stands disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the respondent no. 1 as early as possible. The moment, the respondent no. 1 will receive the representation of the petitioner along with related documents, he shall verify the same and look into the matter and take a decision with regard to honorarium and pass an order in this regard. The amount, which is found to be payable in favour of the petitioner, the same shall be paid to him. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 23rd April, 2026 Jk Uploaded on 21/05/2026