2026:JHHC:29179 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 3194 of 2025 ….….. 1. Sitaram Manjhi, aged about 42 years, S/o Shri Luteshwar Manjhi, resident of Village-Bahinga, P.O.- Ajnaridudhanni, P.S.-Sonara Thadi, District-Deoghar. 2. Rameshwar Soren, aged about 48 years, S/o Shri Baneshwar Soren, resident of Village-Agaiya, P.O.- Basbutia, P.S.-Palojori, District-Deoghar. 3. Nawal Kishor Bhandari, aged about 55 years, S/o Shri Jagdish Bhandari, resident of Village-Nagariya, P.O.- Basbutia, P.S.-Palojori, District-Deoghar. 4. Md. Safruddin Ansari, aged about 50 years, S/o Md. Wahid Mian, resident of Village-Baramsoli, P.O.- Asna, P.S.- Palojori, District-Deoghar. 5. Umesh Kumar Singh, aged about 50 years, S/o Shri Bishwanath Prasad Singh, resident of Village - Nagariya, P.O.-Basbutia, P.S.-Palojori, District-Deoghar. 6. June Sagar Mirdha, aged about 55 years, S/o Shri Situ Mirdha, resident of Village-Tetariya, P.O.-Choudhri Nawadih, P.S.-Palojori, District-Deoghar. 7. Binod Marandi, aged about 49 years, S/o Ram Chandra Marandi, resident of Village-Bhouradih, P.O.- Sagrajor, P.S.-Palojori, District-Deoghar. 8. Reyaj Sheikh, aged about 50 years, S/o Sabir Sheikh, resident of Village-Jamuna, P.O.-Taljagha, P.S.-Palojori, District-Deoghar. 9. Bhola Hasdak, aged about 55 years, S/o Suphal Hasdak, resident of Village-Jamuna, P.O.-Basbutia, P.S.- Palojori, District-Deoghar. 10. Bijolal Murmu, aged about 53 years, S/o Lobin Murmu, resident of Village-Jamuna, P.O.-Basbutia, P.S.- Palojori, District-Deoghar. 11. Habibul Rahman, aged about 44 years, S/o Md. Akbar Miyan, resident of Village-Asta, P.O.-Choudhry Nawadih, P.S.- Palojori, District-Deoghar. 12. Rita Kumari, aged about 47 years, D/o Gyani Sah, resident of Village-Manikpur, P.O.-Madhupur, P.S.- Jasidih, District-Deoghar. 13. Anita Kumari, aged about 50 years, D/o Govind Yadav, resident of Village-Manikpur, P.O.-Madhupur, P.S.-Jasidih, District-Deoghar. 14. Jai Prakash Chaudhary, aged about 54 years, S/o Safi Chaudhary, resident of Village-Chihomnari, P.O.- Basakoba, P.S.-Jasidih, District-Deoghar. 15. Rajesh Kumar Deo, aged about 55 years, S/o Suraya Narayan Deo, resident of Village-Pave, P.O.-Pave, P.S.- Sonara Thari, District-Deoghar. 2026:JHHC:29179 2 16. Gandhari Kumari, aged about 52 years, D/o Kashinath Choudhary, resident of Village-Khanmar, P.O.- Baratand, P.S.-Chitra, District-Deoghar. 17. Govind Prasad Mandal, aged about 58 years, S/o Arjun Prasad Mondal, resident of Village-Pahadtalli, P.O.- Kasathi, P.S.-Devipur, District-Deoghar. 18. Prakash Prasad Yadav, aged about 59 years, S/o Bhubneshwar Yadav, resident of Village-Chhatakurum, P.O.-Patharda, P.S.-Sarath, District-Deoghar. 19. Furkan Ansari, aged about 46 years, S/o Subuktagin Ansari, resident of Village-Lakhanpur, P.O.-Asna, P.S.- Palojori, District-Deoghar. 20. Rita Kumari, aged about 42 years, D/o Pakhir Prasad Yadav, resident of Village-Tumbabel, P.O.-Ti Basdiha, P.S.-Mohanpur, District-Deoghar. 21. Devanti Devi, aged about 39 years, D/o Jagdish Roy, resident of Village-Nununray Nawadih, P.O.-Babandihа, P.S.-Palojori, District-Deoghar. ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary/Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, having office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, Town & District- Ranchi. 2. The Director, State Project, Jharkhand Education Project Council, having office at Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, Town & District-Ranchi. 3. The District Superintendent of Education-cum- Additional District Programme Officer, Deoghar, P.O., P.S. & District-Deoghar. 4. Block Education Extension Officer, Deoghar, P.O., P.S. & District-Deoghar. 5. Block Education Extension Officer, Palojori, P.O. & P.S.-Palojori, District-Deoghar. ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 4938 of 2026 ….….. 1. Amrit Saw, aged about - 56 yrs, S/o. Gulab Sao, R/o. Hedlag, P.O.- Lupung, P.S.- Katkamsandi, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 2. Sandhya Rani Gupta, aged about – 42 yrs, W/o. Sri. Mahendra Kumar Nayak, R/o. Vill- Kasiadih, P.O. + P.S.- Katkamsandi, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Secretary, department of primary Education, Project building, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, 2026:JHHC:29179 3 Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Director, Primary Education, School Education and literacy department, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 4. District Superintendent of Education cum Additional district Program officer, Integrated Education, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S. – Hazaribagh, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 5. Block Education extension officer, Katkamsandi, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S.- Sadar, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 4540 of 2025 ….….. 1. Bibhishan Hembrom, aged about 48 years, son of Sanatan Hembrom, resident of: village and P.O: Bankijora, P.S: Shikaripara, District: Dumka 2. Pramila Marandi, aged about 48 years, daughter of: Shishir Marandi, resident of Pandan Pahari, P.O: Kolha, P.S: Kathikund, District Dumka 3. Kalpana Hembrom, aged about 46 years, wife of Anil Kisku, resident of Bandarpani, P.O: Kolha, P.S: Kathikund, District: Dumka 4. Jainul Ansari, aged about 50 years, son of Samuddin Ansari, resident of vill: Baniyara, P.O: Baniyara, P.S: Hansdiha, District: Dumka 5. Ustar Ahmed, aged about 50 years, son of Abul Ansari, resident of vill: Baniyara, P.O: Baniyara, P.S: Hansdiha, District: Dumka 6. Rinku Kumari, aged about 42 years, wife of Dinesh Yadav resident of village & P.O: Matha, P.S: Saraiyahat, District: Dumka 7. Shakuntala Devi, aged about 44 years, wife of Sanjay Yadav resident of: village and P.O: Samaymatha P.S: Saraiyahat, District: Dumka 8. Sulekha Kumari, aged about 40 years wife of Manikant Yadav resident of: Jamla, P.O: Dighi, P.S: Sariyahat, District: Dumka 9. Veena Kumari, aged about 47 years, wife of Prakash Kumar Yadav, resident of Gadijhopa, P.O: Gadijhopa, P.S: Saraiyahat, District: Dumka 10. Kumari Kavita, aged about 48 years, wife of Sanjay Kumar, vill: Salgora Bandari, P.O: Jokela, P.S: Saraiyahat, District: Dumka 11. Anita Devi, aged about 48 years, wife of Vinod Thakur, resident of Siltha, P.O: Khutahan, P.S: Ramgarh District: Dumka 2026:JHHC:29179 4 12. Kalpana Devi, aged about 48 years, son of Ramanand Yadav, resident of Jomela, P.O. & P.S: Saraiyahat, District: Dumka 13. Kali Babu Soren, aged about 45 years, son of Chemchu Soren resident of Jamamdih, P.O: Jamamdih, P.S Saraiyahat, District: Dumka 14. Champa Kumari, aged about 51 years, wife of Bishnu Prasad Yadav, resident of vill: Mohara, P.O: Dhogni, P.S: Saraiyahat, District: Dumka 15. Jyotish Mandal, aged about 54 years, son of Lalit Mandal, resident of vill: Khirdhana, P.O: Nawadih, P.S: Saraiyahat, District: Dumka..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary, Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O & P.S: Dhurwa, District: Ranchi 2. Secretary School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O & P.S: Dhurwa, District: Ranchi 3. Director, State Project, Jharkhand Education Project Council, Dhurwa, P.O & P.S: Dhurwa, District: Ranchi 4. District Superintendent of Education -cum- Additional District Programme Officer, Dumka, P.O & P.S: Dumka, District: Dumka 5. Block Education Extension Officer, Ramgarh, P.O & P.S: Dumka 6. Block Education Extension Officer, Saraiyahat, P.O & P.S: Dumka, District Dumka 7. Block Education Extension Officer, Kathikund, P.O & P.S: Dumka, District: Dumka ..... Respondent(s) with W.P.(S) No. 2788 of 2025 ….….. 1. Surajmani Kisku, aged about 50 years, wife of Muneswar Marandi, resident of House No. 57, Basaha, P.O. Basaha, P.S. Palojori, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 2. Saroti Soren, aged about 49 years, wife of John Hembrom, resident of House No. 115, Simla, P.O. and P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 3. Sonamanti Marandi, aged about 49 years, wife of Manoshwar Tudu, resident of House No. 45, Faraam, P.O. Aasna, P.S. Palojori, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Primary Education and Literacy 2026:JHHC:29179 5 Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar, P.O. and P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 4. The District Superintendent of Education – cum – Additional District Programme Officer, Deoghar, P.O. and P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 5. The Block Education Extension Officer, Palojori, P.O. and P.S. Palojori, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 6. The President / Coordinator, School Managing Committee, Upgraded Primary School, Gambhariya Tola, P.O. Basaha, P.S. Palojori, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 7. The President / Coordinator, School Managing Committee, Upgraded Primary School, Aamgachhi, P.O. Aamgachhi, P.S. Palojori, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 8. The President / Coordinator, School Managing Committee, Upgraded Primary School, Faraam, P.O. Aasna, P.S. Palojori, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 3923 of 2026 ….….. 1. Ramchhabil Das, aged about 51 years son of Jagarnath Das, resident of Village - Gamhariya, P.O. - Beharkunda, P.S. - Taljhari, District - Dumka, Jharkhand. 2. Ujjwal Kumar Mandal, aged about 41 years son of Rajendra Prasad Mandal, resident of Village - Pitka, P.O. - Beharkunda, P.S. - Taljhari, District - Dumka, Jharkhand.. ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Principal Secretary, Dept. of School Education and Literacy, Govt. of Jharkhand, officiating at Project Building, Dhurwa P.O.& P.S.-Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, having its office at collectoriate Building, Dumka, P.O.,P.S. & Dist.- Dumka. 4. The District Education Officer, Dumka officiating at collectoriate Building, Dumka, P.O.,P.S. & Dist.- Dumka. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Dumka officiating at collectoriate Building, Dumka, P.O.,P.S. & Dist.- Dumka. 6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Jarmundi, officiating at block Hq Jarmundi, P.O.,P.S. - Jarmundi, Dist.- Dumka. 7. The Secretary, Village Level education Committee, Upgraded Middle School, Pitka, P.O. - Beharkunda, P.S. - 2026:JHHC:29179 6 Jarmundi, District - Dumka. 8. The Secretary, Village Level education Committee, Upgraded Middle School, Gamhariya, P.O. - Beharkunda, P.S. - Jarmundi, District - Dumka. ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 4491 of 2026 ….….. 1. Sumitra Devi, aged about – 57 yrs, W/o. Kesho Mahto, R/o. Nawtand, P.O. - Banaso P.S. Bishnugarh, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 2. Rambha Devi, aged about – 56 yrs, W/o. Ramchand Pandey, R/o. Amnari, P.O. Jhargo, P.S. - Taljhari, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 3. Pramila Devi, aged about – 55 yrs, W/o. Jitendra Rajak, R/o. Pelawal, P.O.+ P.S.- Pelawal, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 4. Sabitri Devi, aged about – 41 yrs, W/o. Vimal Mahto, R/o. Vill.-Haram, P.O. – Lilangar, P.S. – Katkamdag, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 5. Rohini Devi, aged about – 48 yrs, W/o. Govind Mahto, R/o. Vill.- Haram, P.O. – Mahrang, P.S. – Katkamdag, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 6. Geeta Singh Bhogta, aged about – 39 yrs, D/o. Shri. Baldev Singh Bhokta, R/o. Vill.- Tehratand, P.O.+ P.S.- Giddi (A), Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Secretary, department of primary Education, Project building, Dhurwa, P.O. - Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagannathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Director, Primary Education, School Education and literacy department, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 4. District Superintendent of Education cum Additional district Program officer, Integrated Education, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S. – Hazaribagh, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 5. Block Education extension officer, Bishnugarh, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S.- Bishnugarh, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 6. Block Education extension officer, Tatijharia, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S.- Tatijharia, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 7. Block Education extension officer, Katkamdag, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S.- Katkamdag, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 8. Block Education extension officer, Katkamsandi, 2026:JHHC:29179 7 Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S.- Katkamsandi, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 3601 of 2026 ….….. 1. Puja Anand @ Pooja Anand, aged about - 47 yrs, W/o. Binod Prasad Mehta, R/o. Vill- Churchu, P.O.- Ichak, P.S.- Ichak, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 2. Sushma Kumari, aged about - 43 yrs, W/o. Sri. Yagender Paswan, R/o. Vill- Meru, P.O. + P.S.- Meru, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Secretary, department of primary Education, Project building, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Director, Primary Education, School Education and literacy department, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 4. District Superintendent of Education cum Additional district Program officer, Integrated Education, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S. – Hazaribagh, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 5. Block Education extension officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S.- Sadar, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 907 of 2026 ….….. 1. Mery Murmu, aged about 39 years, wife of Shyam Charan Murmu, resident of Village Burudih, P.O. Bara Jurni, P.S. Ghatshila, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 2. Singo Soren, aged about 40 years, wife of Ghani Ram Soren, resident of Dhatkidih, P.O. Mahuliya, P.S. Galudih, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 3. Raimat Hansda, aged about 43 years, wife of Basta Hansda, resident of Village Swaspur, P.O. and P.S. Swaspur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 4. Anita Dutta, aged about 57 years, wife of Gopal Chandra Dutta, resident of Village Matigora, P.O. Sitadanga, P.S. Musabani, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 5. Basanti Bhowmick, aged about 46 years, wife of P.K. Bhowmick, resident of Village Birsanaga, P.O. and P.S. Birsanagar, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 6. Priyanka Sardar, aged about 39 years, daughter of Jalhari Sardar, resident of Ramnagar, P.O. and P.S. 2026:JHHC:29179 8 Bagbera, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 7. Gangesh Biruli, aged about 38 years, wife of Chokra Biruli, resident of H.No. 118, Titlatand, P.O. and P.S. Jadugoda, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 8. Kajal Gope, aged about 44 years, wife of Sudarshan Gope, resident of Village Serengdih, P.O. Butgoda, P.S. Potka, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 9. Jamuna Rana, aged about 41 years, daughter of Chaitan Rana, resident of Baldev Basti, near Jugsalai Thana P.O. and P.S. Jugsalai, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 10. Sita Soren, aged about 41 years wife of Shiv Charan Besara, resident of Village Naga, P.O. and P.S. Haludpukur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 11. Singo Majhi, aged about 45 years, wife of Ghaniram Tudu, resident of Village Bingburu, P.O. Gitlata, P.S. Potka, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 12. Parul Sardar, aged about 44 years, wife of Sarbeshwar Sardar, resident of Village Chotahariyan, P.O. Chakri, Kowali, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 13. Shakuntala Hembrom, aged about 41 years, wife of Ghasiram Karmakar, resident of Village Pathargora (Tirildih), P.O. and P.S. Musabani, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 14. Behula Rani Mahato, aged about 51 years, wife of Khirad Mahato, resident of Village Changira, P.O. Gitilata, P.S. Potka, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 15. Sunita Lamay, aged about 42 years, daughter of Kanai Ram, resident of H.No.22, Baliguma, Uper Basti, near Ganga Bihar, P.O. and P.S. Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 16. Susana Kachhap, aged about 46 years, daughter of Poul Kachhap, resident of H.No. 232, Purana Purulia Road, Munda Colony, John Kotej, Mango, P.O. and P.S. Mango, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 17. Suktara Sarkar, aged about 45 years, daughter of Sudhir Sarkar, resident of Rangamatiya, P.O. Gitilata, P.S. Potka, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 18. Suryamani Mahali, aged about 49 years, wife of Ganga Ram Mahali, resident of Village Chirugoda (Matku), P.O. Shankarda, P.S. Potka, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 19. Anima Lamay, aged about 40 years, daughter of Kannya Ram Lamay, resident of Village Baliguma Upper Basti, P.O. and P.S. - MGM College, Mango, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 2026:JHHC:29179 9 20. Biraj Mardi, aged about 46 years, wife of Majhiya Murmu, resident of H.No.8, Nunia, P.O. Bhagaband, P.S. Dumaria, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 21. Jayanti Purti, aged about 39 years, daughter of Kunwar Singh, resident of Village Rohnisora, P.O. Dumaria, P.S. Musabani, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 22. Bimla Hembrom, aged about 47 years, wife of Ranjit Hembrom, resident of Village Chakdohа, P.O. Karaduba, P.S. Ghatshila, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 23. Chinta Mani Tudu, aged about 47 years, wife of Bira Tudu, resident of Village Nuwagram, P.O. Rawtara, P.S. Dhalbhumgarh, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 24. Raimoni Hansda, aged about 41 years, daughter of Bhado Hansda, resident of Village Mahishduba, P.O. Edelbera, P.S. Ghatshila, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 25. Sarita Kisku, aged about 40 years, daughter of Bibhuti Bhushan Kisku, resident of Village Kumriur, P.O. Rakha, P.S. Jadugora, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 26. Suniya Hansda, aged about 44 years, daughter of Rupai Hansda, resident of Village Chukari pada, P.O. Holdajudi, P.S. Dhalbhumgarh, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 27. Kalamabati Tudu, aged about 39 years, wife of Ram Chandra Kisku, resident of Village Kanyaluka, P.O. Bhalki, P.S. Gurabandа, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 28. Kumari Kumodni, aged about 44 years, wife of Raman Kumar Thakur, resident of Bagbera Colony, Road No.6, in front of Qr. No. 40/1/7, P.O. - Tatanagar, P.S. Bagbera, District East Singhbhum. 29. Mangali Murmu, aged about 45 years, wife of Anil Hembram, resident of Village Kankidi, Tola Laldungrі, P.O. Kumir, P.S. Kamalpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 30. Payo Tudu, aged about 43 years, wife of Wasim Tudu, resident of Village Dharampur, P.O. Baharagora, P.S. Barsole, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 31. Shibani Puran, aged about 46 years, daughter of Mansuk Puran, resident of Village Gurbhanga, P.O. Khairpal, P.S. Kowali, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 2. The Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department (Primary Education Directorate), Govt. of 2026:JHHC:29179 10 Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. The Jharkhand Education Project Council through its State Project Director, having its office at JSCA Stadium Road, Sector-3, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The District Superintendent of Education-cum-Additional District Programme Officer, East Singhbhum, having its office at Bishtupur, P.O. and P.S. Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 5. The Jharkhand Academic Council through its Secretary, having its office at Namkom, P.O. and P.S. Namkom, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 903 of 2026 ….….. 1. Mamta Minu Murmu, Aged about 40 years, wife of Chhotka Hansda, Resident of Village- Badtolla, P.O.- Mandro, P.S.- Borio, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher. 2. Sukla Kisku, Aged about 50 years, Son of Munshi Kisku, Resident of Village- Bhurkunda, P.O.- Mandro, P.S.- Borio, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Upgraded Primary School, Kamodari, Mandeo, District- Sahibganj. 3. Emanuel Kisku, Aged about 49 years, Son of Mathias Kisku, Resident of Village- Kohbara, P.O.- Bhagaiya, P.S.- Mirza-Chouki, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Upgraded Primary School, Diyalpur, Mandro, District- Sahibganj. 4. Sushma Devi, Aged about 48 years, Wife of Arjun Thakur, Resident of Village- Ghatiyari, P.O.- Bhagia, P.S. - Borio, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Primary School, Poraiya (Mandro), District- Sahibganj. 5. Roshi Soren, Aged about 46 years, Wife of Dukhiyа Tudu, Resident of Village- Asanbona, P.O.- Mandro, P.S. - Borio, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Upgraded Middle School, Asanbona, Mandro, Mirzachouki, District- Sahibganj. 6. Mina Murmu, Aged about 45 years, Wife of Shivlal Tudu, Resident of Village- Asanbona, P.O.- Mandro, P.S.- Mirzachouki, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher, Upgraded Primary School, Bara Deogar Suiyatola (Mandro), District- Sahibganj. 7. Firdoushi Bano, Aged about 44 years, Wife of Md. Wasim Haroon, Resident of Village- Muslim Tola, Karanpurato, 2026:JHHC:29179 11 P.O.- Karanpura, P.S.- Taljhari, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Primary School, Agutiya, Taljhari, District- Sahibganj. 8. Madhulata Devi, Aged about 43 years, Wife of Lakhan Pandit, Resident of Village- Dudhkоl, P.O. & P.S.- Taljhari, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Upgraded Govt. Middle School, Dudhkоl, Taljhari, District- Sahibganj. 9. Nilam Devi, Aged about 52 years, Wife of Late Deo Nandan Choudhary, Resident of Village- Chhoti Bhagiyamari, P.O.- Sakrigali Ghat, P.S. Taljhari, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Upgraded Primary School, Bari Bhatiyamari, Oraon Tola, P.O.- Sakrigalighat, P.S.- Taljhari, Sahibganj. 10. Dulal Chandra Biswas, Aged about 54 years, Son of Late Pratap Chandra Biswas, Resident of Village- Purvi Narayanpur Colony No. 3, P.O.- Narayanpur, P.S.- Rajmahal District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Upgraded Govt. Middle School, Narayanpur, Diyara No. 1, Rajmahal, Sahibganj. 11. Md. Tqfiqul Islam, Aged about 54 years, Son of Md. Manzoor Sheikh, Resident of Village- Mansingha, P.O.- Narayanpur, P.S.- Rajmahal, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher), Upgraded Govt. Middle School, Samaspur, Rajmahal, District- Sahibganj. 12. Md. Safiruddin, Aged about 53 years, Son of Jhantu Sheikh, Resident of Village- Guhi Tola, Uttar Plasgachhi, P.O.- Plasgachhi, P.S.- Radhanagar, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher), Upgraded Primary School, Nazrul Tola, Udhwa, District- Sahibganj. 13. Chandana Mandal, Aged about 43 years, Wife of Dipak Mandal, Resident of Village- Colony No. 1, Srighar, Udhwa, P.O. & P.S.- Radhanagar, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Upgraded Govt. Middle School, Hindi, Mirjapur, Sahibganj. 14. Binay Kumar Kujur, Aged about 50 years, Son of Tinu Oraon, Resident of Village- Naya Tola Ataulla, P.O.- Binodpur, P.S.- Kotalpokhar, District- Sahibganj Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher), Govt. Primary School Boys, Kotalpokhar, District- Sahibganj. 15. Munshi Tudu, Aged about 52 years, Son of Fagu Tudu, Resident of Village- Laxmi Mohua Tand, P.O.- Panchkathiya, P.S.- Barhait, District- Sahibganj. Presently posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher), Upgraded Primary School, Laxmi Pahar, Barhait, District- Sahibganj. 16. Ahilya Devi, Aged about 48 years, Wife of Hari Shankar Sah, Resident of Village- Sanmani, P.O. & P.S.- Barhait, 2026:JHHC:29179 12 District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Upgraded Middle School, Manjhi Tola, Barhait, District- Sahibganj. 17. Chenebiti Kisku, Aged about 39 years, Daughter of Harma Kisku, Resident of Village- Petkhasa, P.O. & P.S.- Barhait, District- Sahibganj, Posted as Assistant Teacher (Para Teacher) Petkhasa, Upgraded Middle School Barhait, District- Sahibganj ...… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, at MD1, Bhawan, Ground Floor, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi. 2. The State Project Director, Jharkhand Education Project Council, JSCA Stadium Road, Sector-I, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S.- Sahibganj, District- Sahibganj. 4. The District Education Officer-cum-District Program Officer, Jharkhand Education Project, Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S.- Sahibganj, District- Sahibganj. 5. The District Education Superintendent-cum-Additional District Program Officer, Jharkhand Education Project, Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S.- Sahibganj, District- Sahibganj. 6. The Block Development Officer, Mandro, P.O. & P.S.- Mandro, District- Sahibganj. 7. The Block Development Officer, Taljhari, P.O. & P.S.- Taljhari, District- Sahibganj. 8. The Block Development Officer, Rajmahal, P.O. & P.S.- Rajmahal, District- Sahibganj. 9. The Block Development Officer, Udhwa, P.O.- Udhwa, P.S.- Radhanagar, District- Sahibganj. 10. The Block Development Officer, Barharwa, P.O. & P.S.- Barharwa, District- Sahibganj. 11. The Block Development Officer, Barhait, P.O. & P.S.- Barhait, District- Sahibganj. 12. The Block Education Extension Officer-cum-Member Secretary Panchayat, Administrative-cum-Disciplinary Pradhikar, Mirjachowki, P.O. & P.S. Taljhori P.S.- Mirzachowki, District- Sahibganj. 13. The Block Education Extension Officer-cum-Member Secretary Panchayat, Administrative-cum-Disciplinary Pradhikar, P.S.- Mirjachowki, District- Sahibganj. 14. The Block Education Extension Officer, Rajmahal, P.O. & P.S.- Rajmahal, District- Sahibganj. 15. The Block Education Extension Officer, Udhwa, P.O. & P.S.- Udhwa, P.S.- Radhanagar, District- Sahibganj. 2026:JHHC:29179 13 16. The Block Education Extension Officer-cum-Prakhand Sansadhan Kendra Samanyayak, Barharwa, P.O. & P.S.- Barharwa, District- Sahibganj. 17. The Block Education Extension Officer, Barhait, P.O. & P.S.- Barhait, District- Sahibganj. 18. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Bara Deodar, Surya Tola, Mandro, P.O.- Mandro, P.S.- Borio, District- Sahibganj. 19. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Kamodari, P.O.- Mandro, P.S.- Borio, District- Sahibganj. 20. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Poraiya, P.O.- Mandro, P.S.- Borio, District- Sahibganj. 21. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Diyalpur, P.O. Mandor & P.S.- Borio, District- Sahibganj. 22. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Bari Bhagiya-mari, Oraon Tola, P.O.- Sakrigalighat, P.S.- Taljhari, District- Sahibganj. 23. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Govt. Middle School, Dudhkol, P.O. & P.S.- Taljhari, District- Sahibganj. 24. The President/Secretary, Primary School, Agutiya, Taljhari, P.O.&P.S. Taljhari, District- Sahibganj. 25. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Bartalla, Pradhan Tola, Mandro, P.O.- Mando, P.S. Borio, District- Sahibganj. 26. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Middle School, Asanbona, Mandro, Mirzachowki, P.O.- Mandro, P.S.- Borio, District- Sahibganj. 27. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Govt. Middle School, Narayanpur Diyara No. 1, Rajmahal, P.O. & P.S.- Rajmahal, District- Sahibganj. 28. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Govt. Middle School, Samaspur, Rajmahal, P.O. & P.S.- Rajmahal, District- Sahibganj. 29. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Nazrul Tola, Udhwa, P.O.- Udhwa, P.S.- Radhanagar, District- Sahibganj. 30. The President/Secretary, Govt. Primary School, Kotalpokhar, P.O. & P.S.- Barharwa, District- Sahibganj. 31. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Middle School, Manjhi Tola, Barhait, P.O. + P.S. - Barhait, District- Sahibganj. 32. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Petkhasa, Barhait, P.O. + P.S. - Barhait, District- Sahibganj. 33. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Primary School, Laxmi Pahar, Barhait, P.O. + P.S. - Barhait, District- Sahibganj. 2026:JHHC:29179 14 34. The President/Secretary, Upgraded Govt. Middle School, Hindi, Mirjapur, P.O. + P.S. - Barharwa, District- Sahibganj. ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 5317 of 2026 ….….. 1. Vinita Kumari, aged about – 58 yrs, W/o. Sri. Nand Kishore Singh, R/o. Village- Padma, P.O. – Padma, P.S. – Padma, Dist.: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 2. Jhun Devi, aged about – 44 yrs, W/o. Sri. Santosh Kumar Ojha, R/o. Village- Lati, P.O. – Padma, P.S.- Padma, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Secretary, Department of Primary Education, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy Department, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 4. District Superintendent of Education cum Additional District Program Officer, Integrated Education, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S. – Hazaribagh, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 5. Block Education Extension Officer, Cum – Co-ordinator, Block Resource Centre, Padma, P.O. P.S.- Padma, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ..... Respondent(s) With W.P.(S) No. 3753 of 2026 ….….. Awdhesh Kumar Mehta, aged about – 52 yrs, S/o. Anirudh Prasad Mehta, permanent R/o. Vill. Dariya, P.O.- Ratanpur, P.S.- Ichak, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand, at present resident of Vill. Dipugadha, P.O. & P.S. – Sadar, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ..… Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Secretary, Department of Primary Education, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy Department, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 4. District Superintendent of Education cum Additional District Program Officer, Integrated Education, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S.- Hazaribagh, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 5. Block Education Extension Officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh, 2026:JHHC:29179 15 P.O. + P.S.- Sadar, Dist: Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ..... Respondent(s) ….….. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ….… For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate Mrs. Neha Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. Siddharth Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate Mr. D.C. Mishra, Advocate Mr. Abhijeet Anand, Advocate Mr. A.K.Sahani, Advocate Mr. Pawan Kr. Choudhary, Advocate Mr. R.K.Verma, Advocate Ms. Khushbu, Advocate Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate Ms. Anupama, Advocate Mr. Binod Kr. Dubey, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Kr. Dubey, Advocate Mr. Harsh Utsav, Advocate Ms. Akriti Aprajita, Advocate Mr. Jwala Singh, Advocate Mr. Sunny Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. M.K.Roy, G.A.-I Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate Mr. Uttam Kr. Das, A.C. to G.P.-VI Mr. Aditya Kumar, A.C. to Sr. S.C.-I Mr. Oishi Das, A.C. to A.G. Ms. Ruchi Mukti, A.C. to AAG-IA ….….. C.A.V. ON: 10/09/2026 PRONOUNCED ON: 25/09/2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. All these writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Issues and the facts involved are one and the same in all the writ petitions. Therefore, with consent of Ld. Counsels appearing for the parties, the same are decided by this common judgment. 2026:JHHC:29179 16 3. As requested by the partiers, the facts of W.P.(s) No.3194 of 2025 are taken into consideration. As per the pleadings, the petitioners were appointed as Para-Teachers in between 2003 to 2006. At the time of appointment, the minimum educational qualification required was ‘Matriculation’. 4. All the petitioners were having the qualification of ‘Matriculation’ or its equivalent at the time of their appointments. As per the petitioners, they took permission from the Competent Authority and appeared and passed Intermediate (Madhyama) from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, during the period running from 2006 to 2007. 5. In the case of Mukesh Kumar Verma v. State of Jharkhand, reported in 2006 (3) JCR 22 (Jhr), this Court held that Prathama examination certificate issued by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad shall be treated as equivalent to Matric certificate. Even, Jharkhand Academic Council (JAC) issued a Letter No. JAC/2808/08 dated 20.08.2008, informing Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad that Prathama and Madhyama certificates have been recognized as Madhyamik (Matric) and Intermediate (+2) respectively. 6. The issue of certificates granted by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad fell for consideration before this Court in L.P.A. No.117 of 2012 (Sita Ram Manjhi v. State of 2026:JHHC:29179 17 Jharkhand) and by judgment dated 5th July 2012, this Court held that certificates issued by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is equivalent degree to Intermediate. 7. The judgement in the case of Sita Ram Manjhi (supra) was complied by the concerned respondent, for which Memo No.SSA/1046 dated 04.09.2012 was issued by office of Sarveshiksha Aviyan, Deoghar. 8. The Government of India issued office memorandum dated 6th December 2012 by which Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad was granted recognition up to 31st May 2013 with a direction that such order will cease to have effect from 1st June 2013 onwards. Such office memorandum dated 06.12.2012 was forwarded to all Institutions by the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development Department. 9. The All-India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) also published a notice in the Daily, Times of India on 31st October 2017 that the certificate granted could be valid up to 31st May 2013 by such Institution. 10. The certificate granted by another Institution, namely Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayagraj was the subject matter of LPA No.10 of 2021 decided on 30th August 2023 by the Division Bench of this Court, whereby it was held that the certificate granted by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, 2026:JHHC:29179 18 Prayagraj is not valid. A Letter No.2160 dated 26.06.2024 was issued by Jharkhand Education Project Council (JEPC) to do the needful in the matter. Giving reference of such letter, all concerned were directed to proceed. 11. Petitioners have pleaded that though Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad was not the subject matter of L.P.A. No.10 of 2021, nonetheless, the honorarium/salary of the petitioners were stopped from August, 2024. 12. Subsequently, “The Jharkhand Sahayak Adhyapak Seva Shart Niyamavali, 2021” (hereinafter to be referred as Rules 2021), was framed in exercise of power under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, governing the conditions of engagement/appointment of Para-Teachers in the State of Jharkhand. As per Rule 7 (iv) of the said Rules 2021, the certificates of the petitioners were verified and the same were found to be in order. 13. The petitioners were allowed to appear in “Akalan Pariksha” and all the petitioners have cleared such Akalan Pariksha. The certificates of petitioner no.1 have been placed on record as Annexure-11. Out of all 21 petitioners, 18 petitioners passed their Matriculation Examination from Bihar School Examination Board. Petitioner Nos. 19 (Furkan Ansari); 20 (Rita Kumari); and 21 (Devanti Devi) have passed their Prathama examinations from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, 2026:JHHC:29179 19 Allahabad. Petitioner No.19 (Furkan Ansari) did his Sahitya Bhushan (equivalent to Intermediate) from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar in the year 2006 and the certificates granted by Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar were held to be valid up 26.02.2015; petitioner No.20 (Rita Kumari) did her Intermediate from Jharkhand Intermediate Council, Ranchi, but she did her Prathama (equivalent to Matric) from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. 14. According to the petitioners in all the respective writ petitions; despite the fact that petitioners were validly appointed, as they were having the requisite qualification of matriculation or its equivalent on the date of appointment, Letter No.SSA/574, dated 08.04.2025 was issued, whereby it was decided not to take work from the petitioners. Pursuant thereto; the concerned Block Education Extension Officer also issued Letter No.457, dated 11.04.2025, not to take work from Para teachers like the petitioners. 15. The petitioners submitted their representation on 15.10.2024, but when the same yielded no fruitful result, writ petition was filed, seeking relief to quash Memo No. SSA/574, dated 08.04.2025 (Annexure-14) and Memo No.457, dated 11.04.2025 (Annexure-15). The petitioners have further prayed that the respondents be directed to pay the honorarium / salary from August 2024 onwards, which 2026:JHHC:29179 20 have been withheld illegally, though the petitioners are working. 16. Mr. Manoj Tandon, Ld. Counsel appearing for the petitioners, assisted by other Ld. Counsels appearing for the respective petitioners, submitted that the impugned decisions contained in letters dated 08.04.2025 and 11.04.2025 in W.P.(s) No.3194 of 2025, and other impugned decisions in one or the other petitions, are highly arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional, and hence the same deserve to be quashed and set aside with a direction to the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioners for the period they have been working, and go on paying the same. 17. It has been submitted that all the petitioners undisputedly possessed the requisite qualification of matriculation or its equivalent on the date of appointment, which has not been disputed by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the respondent-State and JEPC. It has been further submitted that in the case of Mukesh Kumar Verma (supra), this Court was pleased to hold that Prathama Examination Certificate issued by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is equivalent certificate to Matric. 18. Mr. Tandon draws the attention of this Court of a Division Bench judgement of this Court in L.P.A. No.117 of 2012 (Sita Ram Manjhi vs. State of Jharkhand) dated 5th 2026:JHHC:29179 21 July 2012. He had submitted that Sitaram Manjhi, the Petitioner no.1 of W.P.(s) No.3194 of 2025, is one and the same person who was the appellant in L.P.A. No.117 of 2012, which is apparent from Annexure-2 of the writ petition. He submits that a finding was returned by the Division Bench that degree of Madhyama given by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, ‘Allahabad’ is equivalent degree to Intermediate (+2). 19. It has been further pointed out that L.P.A. No.10 of 2021, which was decided much later on 30th of August 2023, the degree granted by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad was never the question. Instead, the degree granted by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, ‘Prayagraj’ was the issue involved in L.P.A. No. 10 of 2021. 20. Mr. Tandon contended that the above judgement in the case of Sita Ram Manjhi (supra) was complied with also by the concerned Competent Authority by issuing Letter No. SSA/1046 dated 04.09.2012. Therefore, he submits that once the said judgement in the case of L.P.A. No.117 of 2012 (Sita Ram Manjhi vs. State of Jharkhand) has attained its finality, the respondents have no business to take a different decision, that too, after the said judgement was complied with. 21. It has been pointed out by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners that in terms of the provisions 2026:JHHC:29179 22 enshrined in Rule 7 (iv) of Jharkhand Sahayak Adhyapak Seva Shart Niyamavali, 2021, the certificates of the petitioners have been found to be in order and therefore they were allowed to appear in Akalan Pariksha, which they have cleared and the same is not in dispute. 22. It is, therefore, submitted that once the petitioners were validly appointed as they were having the valid qualification on the date of appointment, the respondents cannot be permitted to throw the petitioners out after they have rendered services, though as Para-Teachers, for more than two decades. Therefore, Ld. Counsel submitted that the writ petitions deserve to be allowed. 23. Mr. M. K. Roy, Ld. Counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand, had submitted that the impugned decisions have been taken by the Jharkhand Education Project Council. However, he contended that the Petitioners were appointed as Para-Teachers between 2003-2006. As per the advertisement by which they were appointed, they were required to be “Matriculate”. 24. However, as per the requirements of the NCTE, the Para-Teachers were required to be Intermediate. Accordingly, the State Government allowed time to such candidates to acquire the qualification of intermediate. This time was extended for 8 years. 2026:JHHC:29179 23 25. The Petitioners have not challenged the letter of the State Government by which they were required to upgrade their educational qualification. Thus, they have accepted the requirement of having intermediate or equivalent examination. In fact, the petitioners have submitted certificates of having passed Intermediate or equivalent examination. 26. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that the Certificates submitted in support of their qualification have been issued by such educational institution which had been declared to be invalid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, accordingly, no relief should be granted to these petitioners. 27. Mr. Krishna Murari, Ld. Counsel appearing for JEPC, however, submitted that the impugned decisions taken by the concerned Authority is quite legal and the same do not need any interference by this Court. Mr. Murari refers Annexure-1 of the counter affidavit filed by Respondents 2 and 3, which is judgement dated 01.07.2024 passed in W.P.(s) No. 6021 of 2023. 28. While referring to paragraph No.9 of counter affidavit, he had submitted that the Para-Teachers were required to enhance their qualification to Intermediate before June 2008. The petitioners have obtained 2026:JHHC:29179 24 Intermediate degree from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, which is not in accordance with law. 29. He has also referred to the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan Pradesh Vaidya Samiti Sardarshahar v. Union of India, reported in (2010) 12 SCC 609. He submitted that the issue of recognition of Institution is vested with the Jharkhand State and not with the Jharkhand Academic Council. He has also referred (2011) 3 SCC 436 (State of Orissa Versus Mamta Mohanty). It is the contention of the respondents, therefore, that the writ petitions deserve to be dismissed as no case has been made out by the petitioners to interfere. 30. Having regard to the rival submissions of the Ld. Counsels appearing for the respective parties and after perusing the materials available on record, the following facts emerge which are essential to decide the lis involved in the batch of writ petitions:- (a) The Petitioners were appointed as Para- Teachers between 2003-2006. As per the advertisement by which they were appointed, they were required to be matriculate. However, as per the requirements of the NCTE, the Para-Teachers were required to be Intermediate. Accordingly, the State Government allowed time to such candidates to acquire the qualification of intermediate. This time was extended 2026:JHHC:29179 25 for 8 years. (b) The Petitioners have not challenged the letter of the State Government by which they were required to upgrade their educational qualification. Thus, they have accepted the requirement of having intermediate or equivalent examination. Actually, the petitioners have submitted certificates of having passed Intermediate or equivalent examination. (c) However, the Certificates submitted in support of their qualification have been issued by such educational institution which had been declared to be invalid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, as argued by the Respondents. 31. Admittedly, the petitioners were appointed in between 2003 to 2006. This fact has not been disputed by the Respondents. The educational qualification at the time of appointment was matriculation and this has also not been disputed by the respondents. Repeated questions were put to the Ld. Counsel for the respondent (JEPC) as to whether the petitioners possessed the requisite qualification at the time of appointment or not. In reply, Ld. Counsel appearing for the JEPC submitted that it is true that at the time of appointment, the petitioners possessed the requisite qualification of matriculation. 32. Once the Petitioners were having the valid and requisite qualifications at the time of appointment, the 2026:JHHC:29179 26 petitioners cannot be thrown out of service/engagement on the basis of the fact that the respondents wanted the petitioners to enhance their qualification and the period granted by the State was extended for about 8 years. 33. It further transpires from record that due to elapse of time, a new Rule-2021 has been formulated by the State of Jharkhand and nowadays, the conditions of service / engagement of the petitioners and alike are to be regulated by a Rules framed in exercise of proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, namely, Jharkhand Sahayak Adhyapak Seva Shart Niyamavali, 2021. This has been placed on record as Annexure-10 (WPS 3194 of 2025). 34. As per Rule 3 (v), “Para Teacher” means the teacher appointed on honorarium basis by Village Education Committee / Village Management Committee. Para Teachers have now been renamed as “Sahayak Adhyapak”. The minor punishment and major punishment have also been defined under Rule 3 (xiv) and (xv). 35. It has been defined under Rule 3 (xv) of the said Rule-2021 that major penalty means “deduction in honorarium with cumulative effect” and “termination from service”. The “Disciplinary Authority” has also been explained under Rule-5 thereof. There is a provision for “Aakalan Pariksha” (examination) for competence under 2026:JHHC:29179 27 Rule-8. 36. For enhancement of the honorarium of Sahayak Adhyapak is mentioned in Rule-7. Rule-12 thereof deals with verification of the certificates of Sahayak Adhyapak (earlier known as Para Teachers). “Code of Conduct” has also been defined under Rule-13. 37. Sahayak Adhyapaks (earlier known as Para Teachers) are now also entitled for casual leave, special leave, maternity leave, paternity leave, extraordinary leave, medical leave etc. under Rule- 14. 38. From perusal of this Rule, which is framed in 2021 under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, this Court is of the considered view that the respondents have no power and jurisdiction to throw the petitioners out from service, that too, without following the procedures laid down under these Rules. 39. Termination of service is a major penalty under the Rules-2021, as discussed above. If the petitioners are not being paid their salary from August 2024 and there is a direction to stop taking work from the petitioners, this amounts to major penalty under the Rules, that too, without following the procedure. This is not at all permissible in the eye of the law. 40. Ld. Counsel for the respondents, in particular the 2026:JHHC:29179 28 Counsel appearing for JEPC, has submitted that the petitioners did not enhance their qualification from a recognized Institution, though he did not dispute that the petitioners had the requisite qualification at the time of appointment. 41. The Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No.117 of 2012 (Annexure-2 to writ petition being W.P.(S) No.3194 of 2025) on 5th July 2012 held that the certificate of ‘Intermediate’ obtained from “Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad” was valid. The relevant portion of the judgement is quoted herein below:- “Learned counsel for the writ petitioner-appellant is fully justified in submitting that only teachers' training degree course is governed by the recognition of National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) and for Certificate of Intermediate Course from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, there is no need for recognition by NCTE. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner-appellant further submitted that even Jharkhand Academic Council by its letter dated 28.08.2010 clearly conveyed that the degree of Madhyama given by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is equivalent degree to Intermediate as well as +2 course. In view of the above reasons, the stand of the State cannot be justified on this ground also. Hence, the LPA is allowed and the impugned order dated 20.12.2011 is set aside. The writ petition of the petitioner is allowed. The respondents are directed to take back the petitioner in service without any delay after verification of his certificate.” 42. The aforesaid judgment has attained its finality in view of the fact that the same was implemented by Annexure-3, whereby Memo No. SSA/1046 dated 04.09.2012 was issued. A specific statement to this effect was made by the writ petitioners in Paragraph No. 8 of W.P.(s) No.3194 of 2025 which has not been controverted or 2026:JHHC:29179 29 even addressed in the counter affidavit filed by respondents Nos.2 and 3 (JEPC). 43. It has been argued by the respondents by referring to judgement in W.P.(S) No.6021 of 2023 that the petitioners do not deserve any relief. On perusal of Annexure-R-1 to the counter affidavit filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3, it appears that this judgment relates to some audit objection made by the office of Accountant General. From perusal of the entire judgement of 51 pages passed by a Coordinate Bench, this Court does not find that the issues raised in these writ petitions were at all involved in W.P.(S) No.6021 of 2023 (Abhishek Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.) with analogues cases. 44. The other judgment placed at Annexure R-3 of the counter affidavit filed by Respondents No.2 and 3 is also of no help to respondents as there is a binding precedent of this Court by the Division Bench in the shape of Annexure-2 of the writ petition. 45. The JEPC has also referred (2011) 3 SCC 436 placed at Annexure R-5 of the Counter Affidavit. This judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court does not decide the issue involved in all these writ petitions. 46. The judgment reported in (2010) 12 SCC 609 (Rajasthan Pradesh Vaidya Samiti Sardarshaharb vs. 2026:JHHC:29179 30 Union of India) cited by the Ld. Counsel for the respondent- JEPC, deals with the Institution known as Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag, and not Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. Paragraph No.53 is placed below in extenso: - “53. In view of the above, the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(c) No.21043 of 2008 is allowed and it is held that a person who acquired the certificate, degree or diploma from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag after 1967 is not eligible to indulge in any kind of medical practice. All other Civil Appeals are dismissed. No cost.” (emphasis supplied) 47. Reliance has also been placed by Ld. Counsel for the JEPC of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in LPA No. 10 of 2021, which is enclosed as Annexure-7 of the writ petition itself to contend that all such decisions have been taken by the respondents on the basis of this judgement. The Division Bench while deciding LPA No.10 of 2021 has made following observation in paragraph 54, which is reproduced in herein below:- “54. The argument of learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Single Judge has passed the order by keeping the applicability of the judgement passed by the Division Bench of this court in LPA No.117 of 2012, but, we are not impressed with such argument since herein it is not the case of appellant that the Madhyama certificate which is now being claimed to be equivalent to the Intermediate pass certificate was issued from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, rather, it was issued from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag.” (emphasis supplied) 48. In the opinion of this Court, LPA No.10 of 2021; which is the basis of the respective impugned decisions have been taken by the respondents, was decided specifically in respect of the certificates granted by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag which is evident from paragraph 54 of 2026:JHHC:29179 31 the judgement quoted herein above. The argument of Ld. Counsel for the respondents, therefore, has no leg to stand on this count also. 49. Moreover, this Court is impressed with the argument advanced by the Ld. Counsels appearing for the petitioners that the petitioners were undisputedly possessing the requisite qualification on the date of appointment. Once this fact is not denied by the respondents, the respondents have no business to throw the petitioners out from service indirectly after they have rendered their services for more than two decades. 50. The petitioners may not be entitled for regularization of their services as a government teacher; but at the same time, the respondents have no power to disturb the petitioners on the post of Para-teachers (now known as “Sahayak Aadhyapak”) under the said Rules, 2021. 51. As a matter of fact, with the promulgation of Jharkhand Sahayak Adhyapak Seva Shart Niyamavali, 2021, the respondents are duty bound to continue the petitioners on the post of Para-Teacher (Sahayak Adhyapak) and pay the honorarium for the period they have worked and continue to pay such honorarium / salary strictly in accordance with the new Rules. If at all the concerned Respondent wish to take any action, they must follow 2026:JHHC:29179 32 strictly, the procedure of the new Rule-2021, inasmuch as, now their condition of service will be governed by the new Rules. 52. In view of what has been held above, the impugned decisions dated 08.04.2025 (Annexure-14) and 11.04.2025 (Annexure-15) of W.P.(S) No.3194 of 2025 as well as all other impugned decisions in the respective writ petitions, are, hereby, quashed and set aside. 53. The respondents are directed to allow all the Petitioners of the respective writ petitions to continue as Para-Teachers (Sahayak Adhyapak) and pay their salary from August 2024 onwards for the period they have worked and continue to pay such salary / honorarium. 54. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. 55. Accordingly, all these writs’ petitions stand allowed. Pending, I.As. if any, stand closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Dated:25/09/2026 Amardeep/Fahim A.F.R Uploaded on 29.9.2026