2026:JHHC:25706 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4493 of 2026 -- Sujit Kumar Sinha, aged about 58 years, Son of Surendra Prasad Sinha, Resident of Q/No.- DT 231 P.O.-Dhurwa, P.S. - Dhurwa, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand ..Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The, Principal Secretary Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reform, Project Bhawan P.O.-Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Commissioner South Chhotanagpur Division, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. -Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Deputy Commissioner, P.O. -P.S. -Gumla, And District- Gumla, Jharkhand 5. The District Establishment cum Deputy Collector, P.O.-P.S.- and District-Gumla, Jharkhand ..Respondents --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner(s) : M/s. Saurav Arun, Bhanu Kumar No.1, Rohit Ranjan Singh, Ayushi, Advocates For the Resp.-State : Mr. Divyam, A.C to S.C.-IV -- 02/19.08.2026 The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- a) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s) or direction(s) particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents, to correct/ revisit the date of grant of 1" MACP to the petitioner and correct the same in place of 3.08.2021, it should be 10.11.2016 and modify the same to the extent that letter dated 24.08.2022 as petitioner was appointed/ adjusted on 03.12.2006 but the respondents are considering the petitioner as fresh appointee from 2011 whereas petitioner was already appointed on 30.12.2006 against class-IV post and after order of the Hon'ble High Court the petitioner was recommended to be adjusted in Class-III post on 27.01.2010 and accordingly the order was issued on 02.08 2011 against the class-III post, hence the petitioner was adjusted with effect from 30.12.2006 and cannot be treated as fresh appointed; b) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s) or direction(s) particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents, to make correction in date of the 1" MACP grant 2nd MACP w.e.f., 10.11.2026; c) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s) or direction(s) particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent to consider the case of petitioner after correction of 1st MACP w.e.f., 2016 and that too after 2nd MACP w.e.f., 2026 refix the pay scale of the petitioner and pay arrear thereof; d) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s) or direction(s) particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent to include the period during which the salary of the petitioner withheld/ stop without any rhyme and reason that is for period 2018 to 2022 though said period salary has been given in 2022 but that period has not been included in NPS( National Pension Scheme) in 10% contribution of employee and 2026:JHHC:25706 2 14% contribution of the employer and it will affect the petitioner on account of his superannuation in his retiral benefit w.e.f., 31.08.2027; c) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s) or direction(s) particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent to treat the service of the petitioner w.e.f., 2006 not w.e.f., 2011 as petitioner is simply adjusted in terms of Hon'ble High Court order thereafter shift the date of MACP and grant the 2nd MACP and refix the entire pay scale and pay the arrear thereto; 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant writ application may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned respondent, so that grievance raised by the petitioner in this writ application can be redressed. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner if so chooses he may approach the concerned respondent. 4. Having regard to the limited submission of learned counsel for the parties, without entering into the merits of the case, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the petitioner to file fresh representation before the respondent no.3. The moment the respondent no. 3 receives such representation; he shall take a decision in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. 5. It goes without saying that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, necessary consequential order be issued within a further period of 3 weeks. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 19th August, 2026 Jk Uploaded on 31 /08/2026