2026:JHHC:18266 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 3696 of 2026 ---------- Ashrita Guria, aged about 72 years, wife of late Manohar Bhuinya, resident of village Nandpur, P.O. & P.S. Manoharpur, Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand-833104. ………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, Govt. of Jharkhand, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi. 3. The District Superintendent of Education, Chaibasa, P.O. & P.S. Chakradharpur, Dist. Singhbhum 4. The Principal Accountant General (A&E), Office of the Accountant General, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi. 5. The Principal Primary School Pathervasa, P.O. and P.S. Manoharpur, Dist. West Singhbhum 6. The Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.S., P.O. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi. ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Shubham Sinha, AC to Mr. Mrinal Singh, Advocate Mr. N. Kejriwal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manish Mishra, GP-V For the A.G. : Dr. A.K. Singh, Advocate ---------- 02/ 22.06.2026 The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for following reliefs: (i) For issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to pay to the Petitioner arrears of pension of Rs. 8,87,587/- (Eight Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Eight Seven) for the period 01.08.2013 to 30.09.2016 which has already being approved and sanctioned by the office of the Principal Accountant General and issue to the District Superintendent of Education for completion of formalities so that the escaped pension amount will pay to the Petitioner. (ii) For issuing an appropriate Writ/order/direction upon the Respondents and particularly the Respondent No. 3 to entire payment of the pension of Rs. 8,87,587/- as it was in advertently not paid earlier to the Petitioner. 2026:JHHC:18266 2 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that suffice it would be if this writ petition is treated as representation of the petitioner and a direction be given to the respondents to pass a reasoned order within a stipulated period. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that since no counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of State; as such, petitioner may be directed to file fresh representation before the concerned respondents so that her grievance can be redressed. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances and limited submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the 3rd Respondent to treat this writ application as representation and take a decision with regard to the claim made by the petitioner in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. Petitioner is directed to serve a copy of this writ application to the concerned respondent so that his grievance can be redressed at the earliest. 6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 22nd June, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded 02.07.2026