2026:JHHC:19629 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4643 of 2026 1. Suchita Kumari Soni, aged about 40 years, Wife of Deepak Kumar Swarnkar, Resident of Achaljamu, P.O & P.S Bishnugarh, Dist. Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 2. Sumitra Kumari, aged about 42 years, Daughter of Shibu Mahto, Resident of Vill Haratu, P.O. & P.S. Tatisilway, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3.Basant Kumar, aged about 42 years, Son of Mahavir Nath Sharma, Resident of Tandwa, P.O & P.S. Tandwa, District Chatra, Jharkhand. 4. Jagannath Ganjhu, aged about 50 years, Son of Devi Ganjhu, Resident of Masilong, P.O. Raham, & P.S. Tandwa, Dist Chatra, Jharkhand. 5.Bijay Kumar Prajapati, age about 40 Years, Son of Bandhu Prajapati, Resident of Pankri (Barvadih), Near Mandir, P.O. & P.S. Barkagaon, Dist. Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. ... … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Director, Primary Education, Department of School Education and Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhavan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. District Superintendent of Education, Giridih, P.O+P.S+Dist-Giridih 5. District Superintendent of Education, Ramgarh, P.O+P.S+Dist- Ramgarh 6. District Superintendent of Education, Chatra, P.O+P.S+Dist- Chatra 7. District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh, P.O+P.S+Dist- Hazaribagh 8. District Superintendent of Education, Koderma, P.O+P.S+Dist- Koderma ... … Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhawesh Kumar Tiwary, Advocate Ms. Sarweshwari Kumari, Advocate Mr. Vikram Pradeep, Advocate Mr. Haripriya Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Shirsh Mazumdar, AC to SC-II -------- 2026:JHHC:19629 2 Order No. 2 /Dated: 3rd July 2026 The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners for the following reliefs: “1.a) For issuance of an appropriate Writ /Write Order/Orders, Direction/Directions, particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Respondents to grant the petitioners the Pay Scale with Grade pay of Rs. 4600/- as they are teaching students of Classes I to VIII and are duly qualified with the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) for Classes VI to VIII, In the terms of binding Judgement and order dated 16.12.2024 passed by This Hon'ble Court in W.P. (s) No. 1751 of 2017 (DILIP KUMAR PANDEY & ORS, VS. THE STATE of JHARKHAND & ORS.); AND FOR OTHER CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEFS. b) Issue a further Writ/Writs in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ appropriate, order, or direction, commanding the Respondents to calculate and pay the entire arrears of salary and other consequential benefits accruing to the petitioners on account of the re-fixation of their pay with Grade Pay of 4600/-, along with statutory Interest thereon, within a stipulated period. c) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions direct the respondents to grant the benefits as provided under Grade -IV teachers to the petitioners w.e.f. from date of appointment. i.e. the date after formulation of the appointment rules 2012. d) To declare that fixation of Grade Pay Rs. 4200 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. ...” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the petitioners are fully entitled for the relief prayed for in the instant writ application in view of the fact that similar issue was decided by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 1751 of 2017 which is squarely applicable in the instant case, however, for the reason best known to the respondents they have not considered the prayer of the petitioners till date. Accordingly, he submits that the instant writ application may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the concerned respondent for redressal of their grievance. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that since no counter affidavit has been filed, as such the petitioners may approach the concerned respondent for redressal of their grievance. 4. Having regard to the above and after hearing the interested 2026:JHHC:19629 3 parties, the instant writ application is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the respondent no. 3 by filing detailed fresh representation(s) along with all documents and the judgment relied upon by them. The moment respondent no. 3 receives such representation, he, after verification of the record, shall pass an appropriate order with regard to the claim made by the petitioners in the instant writ application, in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation(s). 5. It goes without saying that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioners, necessary consequential order be issued within a further period of four weeks. 6. In view of the disposal of the instant writ application, pending I.A No. 8214 of 2026 seeking intervention stands closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 3rd July 2026 Amit Uploaded on 9/7/2026