2026:JHHC:26495 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 5368 of 2026 ---------- Bijendra Upadhyay, aged about 68 years, son of late Ramdev Upadhayay, resident of village Balua, P.O. Kamarpur, P.S. Baxar, Dist. Baxar, Bihar. ………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Water Resources Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O.+P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi. 2. Chief Engineer, Water Resources Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O.+P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi 3. Executive Engineer, Water Resources Development Department, Irrigation Division, Siktia, P.O. Siktia Branch Office, P.S. Chitra, Dist. Deoghar. ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Om Prakash, Advocate For the State : Ms. Oishi Das, AC to AG ---------- 03/ 31.08.2026 By way of present writ application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider his case and grant the benefit of pension as well as ACP and MACP, after counting the service rendered by him as daily wager inasmuch as the petitioner was initially engaged as Pump Operator on 01.12.1980 and his services were regularized on 21.03.2011 and thereafter, on attaining the age of superannuation, the petitioner retired on 30.06.2018. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ application is squarely covered by the order passed in W.P.(S). No. 3319 of 2012 (Kaushalya Devi & Ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and another case, decided on 13.03.2026. Accordingly, respondents may be directed to give same and similar benefits to the present petitioner also. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that since counter- affidavit has not been filed, if the petitioner so wishes, he may approach the concerned authorities for redressal of his grievances and if it is found that the case of present petitioner is similar to the petitioners of W.P.(S). No. 2026:JHHC:26495 2 3319 of 2012, the similar benefits shall be granted to the present petitioner also. 4. Having regard to the fair submissions 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. 2. The moment the respondent No. 2 will receive any such representation; he shall verify the factual aspect of the present case vis-à-vis the factual aspect of W.P.(S). No. 3319 of 2012 (Kaushalya Devi & Ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and another case and if the facts/issues involved in the present writ petition is found to be similar to the aforementioned writ petition, the same benefits may be extended to the present petitioner also, in accordance with law, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 5. As a result, the instant writ application stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 31st August, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded 11.09.2026