Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:9188-DB p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Review No. 25 of 2024 1. Ashish Kumar, aged about 43 years, son of Shri Bishnudeo Prasad, resident of Adarsh Colony, Mango, PO and PS: Mango, District: East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur- 831012. 2. Ambujya Kumar Pandey, aged about 44 years, son of Sri Ganesh Pandey, resident of Qr. No. CD-33/2, HEC Colony, PO: Dhurwa, PS: Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi-834004. 3. Sunita Lakra, aged about 49 years, daughter of H.L. Lakra, resident of Albert Compound, Purulia Gumla Road, Ranchi PO GPO PS Lower Bazar, District Ranchi-834001. 4. Shiv Kumar Mallick, aged about 51 years, son of Late B. Mallick, resident of RIMS Colony, Bariatu, PO:Bariatu, PS. Bariatu, Ranchi- 834009. 5. Pankaj Kumar, aged about 54 years, son of Shri R.C. Thakur, resident of 149, New AG Colony, Kadru, Ranchi, PO: Doranda, PS: Argora, District: Ranchi. 6. Vijay Kumar, aged about 58 years, son of late Gobardhan Singh, resident of DT-681 Dam Site, Dhurwa, PO: Dhurwa, PS: Jagannathpur, District: Ranchi-834004. 7. Sanjay Kumar Kapri, aged about 57 years, son of Shri Jai Chandra Kapri, resident of Mohalla Gulzarbagh, Godda, PO, PS, and District: Godda. 8. Nalini Ranjan, aged about 43 years, son of Sri Rajendra Prasad Sah, resident of Gopalpur, PO and PS: Ghatshila, District: East Singhbhum. 9. Piyush Kumar, aged about 42 years, son of Sri Janardan Bhagat, resident of village: Pathargama, PO and PS: Pathargama, District: Godda-814147. 10. Devesh Kumar Sinha, aged about 44 years, son of Shri R.N. Prasad, resident of village: Nawagarh, PO: Kharkharee, PS: Madhuband, District: Dhanbad-828125. 11. Shiv Shankar Prabhat, aged about 54 years, son of Late Satyadeo Prasad, resident of Basant Vihar Colony near Jhirhariapul, Hazaribagh, PO and PS: Hazaribagh, District: Hazaribagh. 12. Kaushal Kishore, aged about 52 years, son of Sri Murlidhar Prasad, resident of Pahantoli, near ITI Barja, Itki Road, Ranchi, PO: Hehal, PS: Sukhdeonagar, District: Ranchi-834005. Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:9188-DB p. 2 13. Amit Kumar Mukherjee, aged about 54 years, son of late Amulya Kumar Mukherjee, resident of Hoogly Cottage, European Quarters, Chaibasa, PO, PS, and District: Chaibasa-833201. 14. Jyoto Xalxo, aged about 54 years, son of Sri Karam Sing Oraon, resident of Opposite Birsa Stadium, Sarai Tank, Morhabadi, PO: Morhabadi, PS: Hatma, District: Ranchi-834008. 15. Monidipa Banerjee, aged about 51 years, daughter of late N.C. Banerjee, resident of Chandraniketan, Shivpuri Colony, Hinoo, PO: Hinoo, PS: Doranda, District Ranchi. 16. Anup M. Kerketta, aged about 49 years, son of Sri Abraham Kerketta, resident of Lowadih, PO and PS: Namkum, District: Ranchi. 17. Uday Kumar Singh, aged about 49 years, son of Sri Binod Kumar Singh, resident of National Public School, New Area, Hazaribagh, PO and PS: Hazaribagh, District: Hazaribagh-825301. 18. Prakash Kumar, aged about 57 years, son of Sri P.P. Srivastava, resident of House No.1, Anand Nagar near Shiv Mandir, Namda Basti, Golmuri, PO and PS: Golmuri, District: East Singhbhum- 831003. ... Appellants/Review Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand-cum-Chairman, State Executive Committee, JEPC, Ranchi, Project Bhawan, HEC, Dhurwa, PO: Dhurwa, PS: Jagarnnathpur, District: Ranchi. 3. The Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, HEC, Dhurwa, PO: Dhurwa, PS: Jagannathpur, District: Ranchi. 4. The Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, HEC, Dhurwa, PO: Dhurwa, PS: Jagannathpur, District: Ranchi. 5. The Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, HEC, Dhurwa, PO: Dhurwa, PS: Jagannathpur, District: Ranchi. 6. The State Project Director, Jharkhand Shiksha Pariyojna Parishad, having its office at New Cooperative Building, Shyamli Colony, Doranda, PO and PS: Doranda, District: Ranchi. Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:9188-DB p. 3 7. The Administrative Officer, Jharkhand Shiksha Pariyojna Parishad, having its office at New Cooperative Building, Shyamli Colony, Doranda, PO and PS: Doranda, District: Ranchi. ... Respondents/Opposite Parties --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR --------- For the Petitioners: Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate Ms. Tanya Singh, Advocate Ms. Akriti Shree, Advocate For the State: Mr. Suman Marandi, A.C. to S.C.-IV For Resp. Nos.6&7: Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate Mr. Ritesh Pathak, Advocate Mr. Raj Vardhan, Advocate --------- 12/Dated: 01.04.2026 I.A. No. 7817 of 2024 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This I.A. seeks condonation of delay of 249 days in filing the review petition. 3. The main reason for the delay appears to be the fact the review petitioners had challenged the impugned judgment and order dated 11th of July 2023 (of which review is now applied) before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition (Civil) (Diary) No. 45119/2023. 4. The Special Leave Petition was, however, withdrawn with liberty to approach the High Court to file a review application. This is evident from the order dated 07.11.2023. 5. After that, the present review petition has been filed. The review petitioners have also referred to certain other impediments which contributed to the delay. Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:9188-DB p. 4 6. On considering the averments in the interim application, supplementary affidavit and after giving due credence to the response of the respondents, we are satisfied that this is not a case where the review petitioners can be said to have acted indolently. They were pursuing the case, possibly on legal advice and, therefore, we are satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown. 7. The delay is condoned and the I.A. is disposed of. Civil Review No. 25 of 2024 8. With the consent of and at the request of learned counsel for the parties, we have taken up the review petition for consideration on merits. 9. Mr. Ajit Kumar, the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners, submitted that the judgment and order dated 4th of July 2023 dismissing L.P.A. No. 565 of 2019 contains errors apparent on the face of record. He submitted that the Letters Patent Bench has relied upon office notings to hold that the consolidated monthly emolument of Rs.14,595/- was inclusive of the 19% increment. He submitted that upon a meaningful reading of the note-sheet which was supplied to the petitioners under the Right to Information Act, it is evident that there was nothing in the note-sheet to indicate that 19% increment amount was included to determine the consolidated monthly emolument of Rs.14,595/-. 10. In the first place, we are satisfied that this is only a case of interpreting the note-sheet and the interpretation by the Coordinate Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:9188-DB p. 5 Bench can hardly be styled as ‘any error apparent on the face of record’. 11. Secondly, the contention now raised was duly considered when dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal. There is no error apparent on the face of record in such consideration. Based not only on the note- sheet but also other facts, Letters Patent Bench reached its conclusion that the LPA warranted a dismissal. Again, there is no error apparent on the face of record. From perusing the review petition, it is apparent that the attempt is to reargue the matter after the Special Leave Petition was withdrawn with liberty to file a review application. No liberty was granted to the petitioners to reargue the matter and based on the grounds urged, no case is made out for exercise of review jurisdiction. 12. Accordingly, we dismiss the review petition, without any order for costs. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Dated: 01.04.2026 N.A.F.R. Manoj/ Sharda/Cp.2 Uploaded on 04.04.2026