Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14537 (JHR)

SUNIL KUMAR v. JHARKHAND ACADEMIC COUNCIL THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN

WPC/2369/2018 · 2026-02-13

Deepak Roshan

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:4058 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C). No. 2369 of 2018 ---------- Sunil Kumar, son of late Dawariaka Prasad Singh, resident of Kustore No. 10, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. Kustore, P.S. Kenduadih, District Dhanbad. …… Petitioner Versus 1. Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi through its Chairman, having its office at Gyandeep Campus, Bargawan, P.O. and P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi. 2. Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, Gyandeep Campus, Bargawan, P.O. and P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi. …… Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : Ms. Richa Sanchita, Advocate ---------- 06/ 13.02.2026 The instant application has been preferred for quashing the result published by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi on 28.05.2013, with respect to the result of petitioner of Teachers Eligibility Test (TET), 2012, which was held on 26.04.2013. Petitioner has further prayed to declare the result of the petitioner afresh by making rectification in the aforesaid result in the light of order dated 10.12.2013, passed in W.P.(S). No. 6056 of 2013. 2. After going through records, it appears that the reasoned order has been passed by the respondents in compliance of the Court’s order, which is annexed with the counter-affidavit, and there is no error in the reasoned order. Further, when the reasoned order has been passed on 02.01.2014, the same has not yet been assailed by the petitioner, though the writ application was filed in the year 2018. 3. It seems that the petitioner has lost interest in this case or otherwise has passed the subsequent TET Exam but since counsel 2026:JHHC:4058 2 for the petitioner is not present to put forth his case, no opinion can be given but certainly, since the reasoned order has not been challenged by the petitioner, no interference can be made in the same. 4. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands dismissed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 13th February, 2026 Kunal/- Uploaded on 17/02/2026