2026:JHHC:2783 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4623 of 2016 -- Vidya Kumari aged about 74 years wife of Sri Pradip Gupta, resident of Kundu Lal Sheal Road, Bompas Town, P.O. Devsangh, P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar (Jharkhand) ...Petitioner Versus 1. State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi 2. Joint Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. Director, Secondary Education, Department of School Education and Literacy, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 4. Regional Deputy Director of Education, Santhal Pargana Division, P.O., P.S. and District Dumka. 5. District Education Officer, Deoghar, P.O., P.S. and District Deoghar. 6. District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar, P.O., P.S. and District Deoghar .Respondents -- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Manish Kumar, Sr. S.C.-II Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, A.C to Sr.S.C.-II -- 13/30.01.2026 The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing of the order dated 01.10.2012, Memo no. 2712 (Annexure-3) by which Director (Secondary Education), Jharkhand has passed order that release of retiral benefits of the petitioner would depend on the final decision of the pending departmental proceedings against the petitioner and for a direction upon the respondents to take a final decision in relation to release of post retiral and other service benefits of the 2026:JHHC:2783 2 petitioner who has superannuated form service on 31.08.2011. During pendency of the writ petition final decision has been taken on 5.9.2018 and as such this this Court has allowed the amendment to challenge and quash the order dated 05.09.2018, Memo. No. 2460 by which Director, Secondary Education, Jharkhand has passed an Order inflicting punishment of withholding the pension in its entirety i.e. 100% contained in Annexure 4 the amended writ petition 2. The petitioner was appointed on 25.5.1985 as Assistant Teacher and was posted in Godda Govt. Middle Girls School, Godda and thereafter the petitioner was transferred and posted as Assistant-Teacher in various other Govt. Schools and lastly while being posted in Govt. Girls Middle School, Deoghar the petitioner superannuated on 31.08.2011. The Petitioner has earlier filed WP(S) No.5600 of 2011 for a direction upon the respondents for release of her post retiral benefits and the same was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 18.11.2011, directing to respondents to decide the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner thereafter filed Contempt Case (Civil) No.639/2012 and during pendency of contempt Case order dated 1.10.2012 (Annx-3) has been passed. During pendency of writ petition order dated 5.9.2018 (Annex 4) 2026:JHHC:2783 3 has been passed and as such amendment has been allowed vide order dated 3.3.2022 and amended writ petition has been filed. 3. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on 25.05.1985. Thereafter, she worked for several years and was granted increments and promotion from time to time. However, on 17.02.2010, a departmental proceeding was initiated alleging that the appointment of the petitioner was made against the rules, inasmuch as neither any advertisement was published nor her name was forwarded by the Employment Exchange. It was also alleged that the roster clearance was also not done as per applicable rules nor any interview was held. 4. The petitioner was asked to submit her reply following which she appeared on 18.05.2011 before Regional Deputy Director Education Deoghar and stated that the appointment of the petitioner has been made in accordance with the law and there is no illegality in it. 5. The Enquiry Officer (Regional Deputy Director Education) found that the petitioner’s appointment was not in accordance with law. Accordingly, on 03.05.2012 and 12.04.2013, she was issued 2nd show-cause notice to which the petitioner has not replied. Thereafter, on 5.9.2018 the impugned order withholding of 100% pension, has been passed by respondent no. 3. 2026:JHHC:2783 4 Hence, she has been constrained to knock the door of this Court. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by virtue of the impugned order, the petitioner has been inflicted punishment of withholding 100% pension; however, on similar allegations, more than 40 co-employees/ teachers were also terminated. All of them filed their separate writ applications and the same were allowed. One of such writ application was W.P.(S). No. 6023 of 2018 (Sushma Kumari @ Sushma Kumari Dev Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.), wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while quashing the order of termination, allowed the said writ application. Thereafter, the respondents preferred an appeal being L.P.A. No. 141 of 2021, which was also dismissed with a direction that the respondent be restored to her post with all financial and other service benefits within 60 working days. Thereafter, the respondents preferred S.L.P. which also stood dismissed. As such, the present petitioner is also entitled for similar benefits. 7. On the other hand, the respondent-State tried to distinguish the facts of this case with the other cases by submitting that the Advertisement was not issued in this case. However, he could not dispute the fact that the points taken in the impugned order with regard to roster clearance is same and similar. Learned counsel further submits that a full-fledged departmental proceeding was held in which 2026:JHHC:2783 5 the allegations against the petitioner has been proved and as such, at this stage no relief can be granted to the petitioner. 8. Having heard the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the records, it appears that the issue involved in this case has already been settled upto the Hon’ble Apex Court. Admittedly, one of the co-employee/ teachers, Sushma Kumari had approached this Court in W.P.(S). No. 6023 of 2018, which was allowed in her favour. The order of the Writ Court was challenged by the State in LPA No. 141 of 2021, which was also dismissed, in which the Division Bench of this Court has discussed the merits of the case. For brevity, para-8 of the order passed in LPA No. 141 of 2021 is quoted herein below: “8. Moreover, the petitioner-respondent has been appointed in the year 1988 and after expiry of more than 20 years, this question cannot be raised as a valid issue. The second point is regarding following up Roster regarding reservation of different category. This issue has been dealt by the Patna High Court in Indra Mandal Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar, 2011 SCC Online Pat 1072, wherein, similar question of Roster clearance was raised and it was alleged that the concerned authority has not taken Roster clearance before appointment. At paragraph 8 it has been ruled by the Patna High Court that in view of the findings of this Court earlier and the claim of the petitioner from before, the onus lays on the respondent to establish on the basis of records of their offices, that either there was no decision of the Divisional Establishment Committee as referred to in the order of appointment of the petitioner issued by the Regional Deputy Director or the Establishment Committee had not taken into consideration any panel of names or had not adopted any procedure before recommending the petitioner for his appointment.” 2026:JHHC:2783 6 09. In crux, the issue with respect to roster clearance involved in this writ application has already been set at rest in favour of the employees. 10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 05.09.2018, issued by the respondent No. 3, Director, Secondary Education, in memo no. 2460 dated 05.09.2018, by which 100% pension of the petitioner has been withheld, are hereby, quashed and set aside and the petitioner is entitled for pension and all consequential benefits. 11. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands allowed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 30th January, 2026 Jk/ Uploaded on 20/03/2026