2026:JHHC:25873 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Review No. 87 of 2026 --------- 1. Ram Jiwan Paswan, aged about 59 years, son of Late Tetar Paswan, resident of Road Division, Sahebganj, P.O. & P.S.-Sahebganj, District- Sahebganj (Jharkhand) 2. Ratneshwar Das, aged about 58 years, son of Late Batoram Das, resident of Road Division, Bokaro, P.O. & P.S.-Bokaro, District-Bokaro (Jharkhand) 3. Ram Kumar Das, aged about 58 years, son of Late Hitlal Ravidas, resident of NREP Khunti, P.O. & P.S.-Khunti, District-Khunti (Jharkhand) 4. Alok Kumar, aged about 38 years, son of Lakshman Prasad, resident of NH Division, Gumla, P.O. & P.S. Gumla (Jharkhand). ……….. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi (Jharkhand). 2. The Development Commissioner, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Joint Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi (Jharkhand). ………… Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioners : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Dhruva Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Sanket Khanna, AC to Sr. AAG ---------- 02/ 27.08.2026 This review application has been preferred by the petitioners in view of the fact that though the counter-affidavit was on record but due to inadvertence at para-4 of the order dated 14.08.2026, passed in W.P.(S). No. 5984 of 2026, it has been observed that no counter-affidavit has been filed, which is the error apparent on record. Accordingly, para-4 needs to be reviewed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the effect of para-4 has been reflected in para-5 of the final order in view of the fact that in the counter-affidavit filed in the main writ application, it is the specific averment of the respondents that the petitioners along with other similarly placed Assistant Engineers have submitted application seeking promotion to the post of Executive Engineers and the said applications are under active consideration. Therefore, finding in para-5 directing the petitioners to file fresh representation is also error apparent on record and the same 2026:JHHC:25873 2 requires modification. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that the counter- affidavit was filed and he also relies on paras- 6 & 7 of the counter- affidavit. 4. Having regard to the above, the order dated 14.08.2026, passed in W.P.(S). 5984 of 2026, is modified to the extent that the original paras-4, 5 & 6 order dated 14.08.2026 stands deleted and the same be read as under: “4. During the pendency of the writ application, the counter- affidavit has been filed wherein it has been stated that the petitioners along with other similarly placed Assistant Engineers have submitted application seeking promotion to the post of Executive Engineer and the said applications are under active consideration. 5. It has been further stated at para-7 of the counter affidavit that the case of the petitioners and other similarly situated persons for promotion to the post of Executive Engineers shall be considered only upon receipt of required vigilance clearance report from the Cabinet Secretariate and Vigilance Department. 6. Having regard to the specific averments made in paras-6 & 7 of the counter-affidavit, the instant writ application stands disposed of by directing the concerned respondents to hold DPC meeting as early as possible, preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 5. With the aforesaid modification in paras-4, 5 & 6 of the order dated 14.08.2026, passed in W.P.(S). No. 5984 of 2026, the instant Civil Review Application stands allowed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 27th August, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded 03.09.2026