( 2026:JHHC:24774 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P(S). No. 251 of 2026 ---- 1. Mahendra Prasad, aged about 58 years, son of Late Kanhai Mehta, resident of Surya Mandir, New Colony, P.O and P.S Barhi, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand .......Petitioner(s) Versus 1. State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O & P.S Dhurwa, District Ranchi 2. The Joint Secretary, Department of Home, Prison &Disaster Management, Government Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District - Ranchi. 3. The Director, State Sainik Kalyan Nideshalaya, Jawan Bhawan, Main Road, Ranchi, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Lower Bazar, District - Ranch. 4. The Assistant Director, State Sainik Kalyan Nideshalaya, Jawan Bhawan, Main Road, Ranchi, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Lower Bazar, District Ranch. 5. The Zila Sainik Kalyan Padadhikari, Zila Sainik Kalyan Karyalaya, Gumla. P.O. & P.S. Gumla, District Gumla. .....Respondent(s) --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --- For the Petitioners : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate : Mr. P.P Roy, Advocate : Mr. Supriya Dayal, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Shubham Sinha, AC. to Mr. Nipun Bakshi, Advocate --- 03/ Dated: 17.08.2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing and setting aside the order dated 11.07.2025, whereunder the claim of the petitioner, praying for his transfer from one district to another i.e. from Zila Sainik Welfare Office, Gumla to the Zila Sainik Welfare Office, Hazaribagh held to be improper and the same has been rejected. ( 2026:JHHC:24774 ) 3. However, the petitioner submits that on sympathetic ground, he may be given liberty to approach the concerned respondent and he may be directed to re-consider the impugned order by going through the medical certificates. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that though affidavit has been filed denying the claim of the petitioner, but if the petitioner so chooses to approach the 3rd respondent on medical/sympathetic ground, he would be free to do so. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions and without going into the merits of the case, the instant writ application stands disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the 3rd respondent with a prayer to re-consider the impugned order on the ground of medical necessity for which the petitioner would file a detailed representation along with medical certificates. If the petitioner prefers a fresh representation on the ground of medical necessity within a period of 4 weeks from the date of uploading of this order; the same shall be disposed of accordingly. 6. Pending I.A., if any, also stands closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 17.08.2026 Abha/-