2026:JHHC:24991 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 1332 of 2024 ----- Pragati Medical, Main Road, Saraidhela, P.O. Saraidhela, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand represented through its proprietor Sudha Khaitan, W/o Jai Prakash Khaitan, R/o Khaitan Bhawan, Ratanji Road, Near Pisto Devi Vidya Bhawan School, Purana Bazar, PO Dhanbad, PS Dhanbad, District Dhanbad .... Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, PO Dhurwa, PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi 2.The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand 3.The Project Director, National Health Mission, Namkum, PO, PS. Namkum, District Ranchi 4.The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad 5.The Civil Surgeon, Civil Surgeon Office, Dhanbad … Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1365 of 2024 ----- Ravi Associates, having its office at Main Road, Saraidhela, PO Saraidhela, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand represented through its proprietor Jai Prakash Khaitan, S/o Late R.L. Khaitan, Director of Jash Ganga Promoters Pvts. Ltd. having its office at 3rd Floor, Pragati Medical Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. Saraidhela, PO, PS Saraidhela, District Dhanbad .... Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, PO Dhurwa, PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi 2.The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand 3.The Project Director, National Health Mission, Namkum, PO, PS. Namkum, District Ranchi 4.The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad 5.The Civil Surgeon, Civil Surgeon Office, Dhanbad … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Ms. Prerna Jhunjhunwala, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shivam Kumar, AC to AG …...... 11/ 18.08.2026: Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. It has been submitted by the parties that the admitted dues have been paid. 3. Admitted principal amount has already been paid to the petitioners, which the petitioners and respondents both have accepted. 4. Petitioners are claiming for interest. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is unjust enrichment by the State by not paying the amount in time, so interest must be awarded. 6. Whether there was unjust enrichment or not and what is the amount, is a question of fact which has to be proved by leading evidence. Thus, this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not inclined to entertain the claim of interest. Petitioners should approach the appropriate forum claiming interest. 7. With the aforesaid observations, these writ petitions stand disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 18th August, 2026 R.S./S.K.C. Uploaded on 19/08/2026