BUDDHA SHAIKSHANIK VIKAS PARISHAD, THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN MR. BIPIN BEHARI SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
WPC/2010/2026 · 2026-04-01
Sri Ananda Sen
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2901 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2901 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:9177 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (C) No.2010 of 2026
-------
BUDDHA SHAIKSHANIK VIKAS PARISHAD, an organization registered under the Societies Registration Act having its registered office at Hirapur, P.O.P.S. Distt. Dhanbad (Jharkhand) through its Executive Chairman MR. BIPIN BEHARI SINGH, aged about 68 years, Son of Kamal Deo Singh. Resident of House No. 305, Uma Shanti Apartment, Kanke Road, P.O. + P.S. Kanke, Konge, District Ranchi (Jharkhand).
.... Petitioner(s).
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Secretary, S.T., S.C., Minority and Backward Class Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, Distt. Ranchi (Jharkhand)
3. The Tribal Welfare Commissioner, S.T., S.C., Minority and Backward Class Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Morabadi, P.O. Ranchi University, P.S. Bariyatu, Distt. Ranchi (Jharkhand)
4. The Member Secretary, Jharkhand Ashram and Eklavya Vidyalaya Education Society (JAEVES), Government of Jharkhand, Kalyan Complex, Morabadi, P.O. Ranchi University, P.S. Bariyatu, Distt. Ranchi (Jharkhand)
5. The Secretary, Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India, Kartavya Path, Rajpath Area, Central Secretariat, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Parliament Street, Distt. New Delhi.
6. The Commissioner, National Education Society for Tribal Students (NESTS), Jeevan Tara Building, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Parliament Street, Distt. New Delhi
… Respondents.
-------
CORAM :
SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. L.C.N. Shahedeo, Advocate
Mr. Yash Raj Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Aditya Raman, AC to GA-III
------
02/ 01.04.2026: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner at the very outset submits that the prayer No.i and iv are now become infructuous.
3. The prayer Nos.ii and iii are as follows:
“(ii). Further be pleased to issue an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s) / direction(s) particularly a writ in nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents, particularly respondent no.3 to extend the MoU agreement of the petitioner for a further period of 2 years for the purpose of operating, maintaining and managing the Eklavya Model Residential School, Kujra, Lohardaga for the academic
session 2026-2027; 2027-2028. (iii). Further be pleased to issue an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s) / direction(s) particularly a writ in nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents, particularly respondent no.3 to release the fund in favour of the petitioner for operating, maintaining the Eklavya Model Residential School, Kujra, Lohardaga for the academic session 2025-2026.”
4. In this case the petitioner is a NGO, who is managing Eklavya Model Residential School, Kujra, Lohardaga for the academic session 2025-2026.
5. It is the case of the petitioner that MoU has come to an end and there is a provision for extension of the MoU but the respondents are not entering the same.
6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that necessary fund also has to be released for maintenance of the said school for the academic session 2025-2026 which has also been withheld.
7. Considering the aforesaid two prayers made by the petitioner, I am of the opinion that no mandamus can be issued to the respondents to extend the MoU. It is upon the respondents to decide as to whether MoU needs to be extended or not as the same is a policy decision.
8. Releasing of the funds also depends upon various factors which only the respondents can consider and decide. Thus, I direct the petitioner to approach the respondent No.3-The Tribal Welfare Commissioner, S.T., S.C., Minority and Backward Class Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi with the appropriate application.
9. Once the respondent No.3 is approached, the respondent No.3 will consider the claims, rights and necessity and then pass an appropriate order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with the representation.
10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is
disposed of.
(ANANDA SEN, J.) 1st April, 2026 Madhav/- Uploaded on:02/04/2026
-2-