2026:JHHC:8321 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1778 of 2026 ----- 1.Pratibha Kumari, D/o Sambhu Sahu, Resident at K.M. Mullick Road, Near D.A.V. Nandraj Modern School, P.O. & P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 2.Amit Kishor, S/o Kedar Prasad Nayak, Resident at Vill DantoBehind Hanuman Temple, Jorna Road, P.O. Dotas, P.S. Kasmar, District Bokaro, Jharkhand ------ Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.The Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand 3.The Director, Secondary Education, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand 4.The Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand 5.Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, through its Chairman, Chaibagan Gali, kali Nagar, Namkum, P.O. & P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 6.The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Chaibagan Gali, Kali Nagar, Namkum, P.O. & P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi, Jharkhand ------ Respondent(s) …… CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shubham Mishra, Advocate Mr. Gyandev Raj, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sonal Tiwary, AC to AG For the Resp-JSSC : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate Mr. Jay Prakash, Advocate …...... 02 / 23.03.2026: Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondents- JSSC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner No.2 namely Amit Kishore has been recommended for appointment to the post of Sahayak Acharya, for the subject of Math and Science, yet he has not received his appointment letter. 3. Considering the said submission, I am of the opinion that this writ petition so far as petitioner No.2, namely, Amit Kishor is concerned, wherein he claimed for consideration of his appointment, has become infructuous as his claim is redressed. 4. The respondents are directed to take steps for issuing appointment letter in the name of petitioner No.2, namely, Amit Kishor. 5. So far as petitioner No.1, namely, Pratibha Kumari is concerned, on query, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner No.1 has obtained lesser marks than the last selected candidates as on date. 6. Considering his submission, since the last selected candidates in the category and subject of the petitioners has obtained more marks than the petitioner No.1, no relief can be granted to the petitioner No.1, at this stage. Thus, her prayer is rejected. 7. During argument, Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, learned counsel for the respondents-JSSC submits that the selection process is continuing. 8. Considering his submission, if in future, it is found that any person in the category and subject to the petitioner No.1 has obtained lesser marks than the petitioner No.1, has been appointed, the petitioner No.1 will be at liberty to approach the JSSC. In such situation, the JSSC will pass an appropriate order as per law. 9. With the aforesaid observation, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 23th March, 2026 R.S./ Uploaded on 25/03/2026