PURNENDU KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
WPC/1925/2026 · 2026-03-26
Sri Ananda Sen
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 14392 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 14392 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:8740 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
WP(S) No.1925 of 2026
----- Purnendu Kumar (Age about 45 years) S/o Late Rabindra Nath Mandal resident of Flat No. 1B, 5th Phase, Adarshnagar Society, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. Sonari, District East Singhbhum (Jharkhand).
… Petitioner(s).
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi (Jharkhand).
2. The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Jharkhand, M.D.I Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi (Jharkhand).
3. The Director, Secondary Education, School Education and Literacy Department, Jharkhand, M.D.I Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi (Jharkhand).
4. The Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Jharkhand, M.D.I Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Ranchi (Jharkhand). Dhurwa, District
5. The Regional Joint Director of Education (R.J.D.E), Chaibasa, Kolhan Division, Chaibasa, P.O. and P.S. Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum (Jharkhand). 6.The Deputy Commissioner cum The Chairman, District Establishment Committee, Jamshedpur, P.O. and P.S. Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum (Jharkhand).
7. The District Education Officer, Jamshedpur, P.O. and P.S. Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum (Jharkhand).
… Respondent(s).
CORAM :
SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Verma, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ashish Kr. Shekhar, AC to SC (L&C)-II
Mr. Mithilesh Singh, Advocate …......
03 /26.03.2026: Heard the learned counsel representing the petitioner and the learned counsel representing the respondents.
2. The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher. Due to some irregularity/illegality committed by the petitioner, he was transferred. The petitioner challenged the order of transfer in WP(S) No. 4029 of 2025 on the ground that the transfer order is punitive.
2026:JHHC:8740 2
3. This Court after going through the transfer order vide order dated 19.08.2025 allowed the writ petition holding that the transfer
order is punitive as there are allegations levelled against the petitioner and on the basis of such allegations the petitioner was transferred. This Court set-aside the order of transfer with liberty to the respondents to initiate a proceeding on the allegation levelled against the petitioner.
4. Be it noted that the petitioner approached the Court on the ground that the transfer order is punitive and without any departmental proceeding, transfer is by way of punishment could not have been ordered.
5. Now once the transfer order was set-aside and since there was allegations of misconduct against the petitioner, the respondents initiated a departmental proceeding by serving memo of charge to the petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner misbehaved with the students and parents and it was also found that the petitioner was taking excessive amount for enrollment and also committed some mischief with the girl students. On the basis of the said allegations chargesheet has now been submitted against the petitioner.
6. Now the petitioner has approached this Court praying therein to quash the charge on the ground of delay and several other grounds.
7. After hearing the parties, I find that the chargesheet definitely reflects some allegations which amounts to misconduct.
2026:JHHC:8740 3
The same needs to be enquired into in a departmental proceeding. No preliminary enquiry can substantiate these charges. The preliminary enquiry is only to arrive at a conclusion whether any departmental enquiry needs to be initiated or not. In this case the respondents have taken a decision to hold the departmental enquiry based on the charges. Thus chargesheet has been issued.
8. I find no illegality in issuance of the chargesheet. Thus, I am not inclined to interfere with the departmental proceeding. The petitioner should participate in the departmental proceeding.
9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands dismissed.
(ANANDA SEN, J.) 26.03.2026 Tanuj/CP-2
Uploaded on 01.04.2026