Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19672 (JHR)

SHRAVAN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY

WPC/875/2026 · 2026-07-06

Deepak Roshan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:20125 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 875 of 2026 Shravan Kumar, aged about 44 years, Son Late Sitaram Bhagat, at present residing at Kechuwa Chowk, Mahagama, Nahar Road (Near New Shabnam Gas Godam), PO-Mahagama, PS-Mahagama, District-Godda. PIN-814154. ... … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Department of School Education & Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, MDI Bhawan, P.O & P.S-Dhurva, District-Ranchi. 2 The Director, Secondary Education, Department of School Education & Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, MDI Bhawan, P.O & P.S-Dhurva, District-Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner cum Chairman, District Secondary Education Establishment Committee, Godda, P.O, P.S & District- Godda 4. The District Education Officer, Godda, P.O, P.S & District-Godda ... … Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudarshan Shrivastava, Advocate Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Divyam, AC to SC-IV -------- Order No. 04 /Dated: 6th July 2026 The instant writ application has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs: “1. a) To quash/set aside the order as contained in memo no. 1160 dated 01.08.2025 (Annexure -14) issued by District Education Officer, Godda wherein the petitioner has been inflicted with major punishment of "withholding of three (3) annual increment with cumulative effect under part V of Rule 14 of Jharkhand Government Servant (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2016 in a departmental proceeding. b) To direct the respondents to release the withheld increments and grant all consequential benefits arising thereupon. c) Further prays for issuances of any other appropriate order(s)/direction(s) and relief(s) for which the petitioner is found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of this case for doing conscionable justice.” 2. A counter affidavit dated 30.06.2026 on behalf of the respondents is 2026:JHHC:20125 2 presented in the Court; same is taken on record. 3. Mr. Sudarshan Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed imposing major punishment; however, the Jharkhand Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2016 has been violated, inasmuch as, there was no oral evidence in order to substantiate the charge against the petitioner. Further, there is no forensic report as to whether the WhatsApp/viral video, which has become the genesis of this charge, has any genuinity. 4. Learned counsel draws attention of this Court towards paragraph nos. 32 and 34 with regard to non-supply of enquiry report as well as non- examination of oral witness. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the procedure has been followed but in the counter affidavit there is no denial of the fact that no witness has been examined. 6. Having regard to the above, it appears that there is a procedural irregularity; as such, interest of justice would be sufficed by quashing the impugned order of punishment. Accordingly, the impugned order as contained in Memo No. 1160 dated 01.08.2025, is hereby, quashed and set-aside. However, the respondents would be at liberty to initiate the proceeding, if so advised, from the stage of enquiry proceeding strictly in accordance with Jharkhand Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2016 and also the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in catena of judgments “Satyendra Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another” 1 and “Jai Prakash Saini v. MManaging Director U.P Cooperative Federation Ltd.”2. 7. It goes without saying that since the impugned order has already been quashed; as such, the monetary benefits from which the petitioner was prevented, shall be paid to him within a period of 8 weeks from the date receipt of receipt of copy of this order. 1 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3325 2 2026 SCC OnLine SC 505 2026:JHHC:20125 3 8. As a result, the instant writ application stands allowed, in the aforesaid terms. Pending I.A, if any, also stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 6th July 2026 Amit Uploaded on 10/7/2026