Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 25463 (JHR)

THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF HOME MINISTRY DEPARTMENT v. AJAY PRASAD

LPA/507/2025 · 2026-09-08

Rajesh Shankar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:26988-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 507 of 2025 1. The State of Jharkhand through, the Principal Secretary of Home Ministry Department Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Ranchi. 2. The Inspector General of Home Guard, Jharkhand, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi. 3. The Commandant cum Director, Home Guard Jharkhand Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi. 4. The District Commandant Officer East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S.-Bistupur, District-East Singhbhum. 5. The District Magistrate East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S.- Bistupur, District-East Singhbhum. ... Appellants Versus Ajay Prasad, son of Baijnath Prasad, resident of Dev Nagar, Baradwari, P.O. & P.S.-Sakchi, Town Jamshedpur Dist-East Singhbhum ... Respondent --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR --------- For the Appellants: Mr. Jayant Franklin Toppo, G.A-V For the Respondent: Mr. Anshuman Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate --------- 02/Dated: 08.09.2026 1. Heard Mr Jayant Franklin Toppo, learned G.A-V for the appellants and Mr Anshuman Kumar, learned counsel who appears with Mr Ashok Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Mr. Anshuman Kumar, on instructions states that the respondent Ajay Prasad has expired. He further states, on instructions from the legal representatives of late Ajay Prasad that they no longer wish to pursue the claim for equal pay for equal work, which late Ajay Prasad had sought in the writ petition. 3. Accordingly, by accepting the above statements, we dispose of this appeal and IAs therein. 2026:JHHC:26988-DB 4. However, we clarify that the issues of law as may have been raised in this appeal are left open to be decided in an appropriate case, including, the connected L.P.A. No. 508 of 2025. Therefore, the disposal of this appeal on the above ground will not affect the proceedings in L.P.A. No. 508 of 2025 or any other matter where such issue arises or is raised. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) September 08, 2026 N.A.F.R. VK/Nandini Uploaded on 10.09.2026