2026:JHHC:26406 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 5839 of 2026 ---------- 1. Ram Badan Singh, aged about 75 years, son of Late Ram Bilash Singh, resident of Plot No 36 Lohanchal Colony, Sector-12 Bokaro Steel City, P.O. Marafari Colony, P.S. Sector 12 Police Station, District Bokaro 827012, Jharkhand. 2. Ramakant Sharma, aged about 75 years, son of Late Sheodhyan Sharma, resident of S.210, Pragna Uptown Electronic City Phase -1, P.O. and P.S. Electronic City Phase I, Dist. Bangalore-560100, Karnataka. 3. Akhila Nand Pathak, age about 74 years, son of Late Bishwanath Pathak, resident of Ramdulari Vatikanear Raj Lakshmi Farm House Kushumpuram Danapur P.O. Danapur Cantt P.S. Rupaspur Nagar, District- Danapur, Patna ………. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. 3. The Director, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi 4. The Vice-Chancellor, Vinobha Bhave, university NH 33, Sindoor, Hazaribagh, P.O. Hazaribagh Head Office and P.S Hazaribag Jharkhand. 5. The Registrar, Vinobha Bhave, university NH 33, Sindoor, Hazaribagh, P.O. Hazaribagh Head Office and P.S Hazaribag Jharkhand. 6. The Vice-Chancellor, Sido Kanhu Murmu University Dumka, P.O. Dighi Dumka, P.S. Dumka Muffasil, District Dumka, Jharkhand. 7. The Registrar, Sido Kanhu Murmu University Dumka, P.O. Dighi Dumka, P.S. Dumka Muffasil, District Dumka, Jharkhand. ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioners : M/s. Saurav Arun, Bhanu Kumar, Rohit Ranjan, Advocates For the State : Ms. Ruchi Mukti, AC to AAG-IA For the University : Mr. Mithilesh Singh, Advocate Mr. Amresh Kumar, Advocate Ms. Rashi Sharma, Advocate Ms. Riya Raj, Advocate ---------- 02/ 31.08.2026 By way of present writ application, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: 2026:JHHC:26406 2 a. For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) or particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to appropriately re-fixation of the pay scale of Petitioner under the 5th Pay Scale in the scale of Rs. 12000-18300 by fixing their basic pay at Rs. 14,940/- instead of Rs. 12,000/- with effect from 01.01.1996 (or the date on which they completed 5 years of substantive service as a Reader), in terms of guidelines and Government Letters dated 30.11.2004 and 30.05.2005. b. For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) or particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to calculate and release the financial effects, arrears of salary, and recalculations running from 01.01.1996 continuously through subsequent pay revisions till date, along with consequential benefits including interest, in view of the pay revision guidelines and Government Orders dated 30.11.2004 and 30.05.2005. c. For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) or particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the Respondents to resolve and restore the Ph.D. increments given to the petitioners on account of holding a Ph.D. degree, which has been severely curtailed and withdrawn behind the back of the petitioners without providing any show-cause notice or affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing, in absolute violation of the principles of natural justice. d. For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) or particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondent after fixing the revised pay scale of the petitioners in 5th Pay revision commission for the revised pay scale in 6th and 7th PRC and refix the pay-scale. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in this writ application is squarely covered by the order passed in W.P.(S). No. 6731 of 2024 (Churaman Prasad Dangi & Anr. Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases, decided on 18.08.2026. Accordingly, respondents may be directed to give same and similar benefits to the present petitioners also. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that since counter- affidavit has not been filed, if the petitioners so wish, they may approach the concerned authorities for redressal of their grievances and if it is found that the cases of present petitioners are similar to the petitioner of W.P.(S). No. 6731 of 2024, the similar benefits shall be granted to the present petitioners 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 petitioners to file fresh 2026:JHHC:26406 3 representation(s) before the respondent No. 3. The moment the respondent No. 2 will receive any such representation(s); he shall verify the factual aspect of the present case vis-à-vis the factual aspect of W.P.(S). No. 6731 of 2024 (Churaman Prasad Dangi & Anr. Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases 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 petitioners 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