2026:JHHC:2281 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(S) No.23 of 2024 ----- BINDESHWAR PRASAD SINGH, son of Sri Lakshmi Prasad Singh, aged about 54 years, resident of Campus of District Dairy Development Office, Hazaribag, P.O. Reformatory School, Hazaribag, P.S. Hazaribag, District Hazaribag.… Petitioner(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Co-operative, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. 3. The Director, Dairy Development Directorate, Jharkhand, Farmers Training Centre Campus, Sector-2, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 4. The District Dairy Development Officer, Hazaribag, P.Ο. & P.S. Hazaribag, District Hazaribag. … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Prakash, AC to SC-IV …...... 06 /29.01.2026: Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. The petitioner admittedly is the Driver working under the respondents. He is working since 1994, thus, he has worked for 31 years. There is no complaint from the employer (State) in relation to his work. 3. The petitioner has approached this Court praying that his services may be confirmed. He submits that his salaries are paid on regular pay-scale and he is getting all the other benefits. If his services is not confirmed, in long run after his superannuation it will create an impediment, in payment of his retiral dues. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the case of the petitioner cannot be considered as the petitioner has not passed the Class-VIII rather he has studied upto Class-V but admits that the petitioner is working for 31 years, and there is nothing in the counter affidavit to suggest that there is any complaint against the petitioner from the side of the employer or he is not being paid salary on regular pay-scale. 2026:JHHC:2281 2 5. In a similar matter where the absence of the minimum educational qualification required for a particular post fell for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Bhagwati Prasad and Delhi State Mineral Development Corporation” reported in (1990) 1 SCC 361, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph No. 6 has held as under: “6. The main controversy centres round the question whether some petitioners are possessed of the requisite qualifications to hold the posts so as to entitle them to be confirmed in the respective posts held by them. The indisputable facts are that the petitioners were appointed between the period 1983 and 1986 and ever since, they have been working and have gained sufficient experience in the actual discharge of duties attached to the posts held by them. Practical experience would always aid the person to effectively discharge the duties and is a sure guide to assess the suitability. The initial minimum educational qualification prescribed for the different posts is undoubtedly a factor to be reckoned with, but it is so at the time of the initial entry into the service. Once the appointments were made as daily rated workers and they were allowed to work for a considerable length of time, it would be hard and harsh to deny them the confirmation in the respective posts on the ground that they lack the prescribed educational qualifications…….” 6. Further, there is nothing in the counter affidavit to suggest that the petitioner is not working and there is any grievance against the petitioner from the side of employer. 7. In view of the aforesaid fact, impugned order dated 07.11.2023 is quashed. 8. Further, considering the long tenure of the service of the petitioner and since the regular pay-scale is also being granted to the petitioner, I direct the respondents to immediately confirm the service of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order to that effect, within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 9. This writ petition is allowed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 29.01.2026 Tanuj/CP-2 Uploaded on 30.01.2026