( 2026:JHHC:21685 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C). No. 1548 of 2020 M/S Ramesh Kumar through its Proprietor Ramesh Kumar, aged about 59 years, son of late Bihari Lal, Resident of Baraik Mohalla, Gumla, PO & PS – Gumla, District- Gumla. … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, at Project Building, Dhurwa, PO & PS – Dhurwa, District – Ranchi. 3. The Schedule Tribe Welfare Commissioner, Ranchi, at project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi, PO & PS – Dhurwa, District – Ranchi. 4. The Deputy Director, Schedule Tribe Welfare Commissioner, Dhurwa, Ranchi, at Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi, PO & PS – Dhurwa, District – Ranchi. 5. The Deputy Commissioner, Palamu at Medninagar, PO & PS – Daltonganj, District – Palamu at Medninagar. 6. The District Welfare Officer, Palamu at medininagar, PO & PS – Daltonganj, District – Palamau at Medninagar. 7. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kutchery Premises, Daltonganj, PO & PS - Daltonganj, District – palamu at Medninagar. … … Respondent --- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate --- 11/22nd July, 2026 1. Counter affidavit is kept on record. 2. In this writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to disburse Rs. 1,54,893/- which the petitioner is entitled to. 3. Now, by filing counter affidavit, learned counsel for the respondents submit that the amount has already been credited in ( 2026:JHHC:21685 ) 2 the account of this petitioner in the month of December, 2025 itself. 4. Since the amount has already been disbursed, nothing remains to be paid to the petitioner. 5. So far as the claim of interest is concerned, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bank- State, vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that it is due to the fault of the petitioner that the said amount was not disbursed within time. 6. Consider the fact that there is a serious dispute in respect of the interest in question, I am not inclined to pass any order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If the petitioner claims the same, it will be open to him to approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. 7. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Aditi Dated: 22.07.2026 Uploaded on 23.07.2026