2026:JHHC:360 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 29 of 2026 Nirbhay Kumar Singh son of late Naresh Prasad Singh @ Naresh Singh, resident of village Gidhani (Gamharia) P.O Deopur, P.S. Jasidih, Sub-Division and District- Deoghar. … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Govt. of Jharkhand, at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Govt. of Jharkhand, at Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Chief Secretary, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Govt. of Jharkhnand, at Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi. 4. The Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj. 5. The Superintending Engineer, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Barhait Division, Near S.P. Mahila College, Dumka, Jharkhand. 6. The Executive Engineer, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Barhait Division, Near S.P. Mahila College, Dumka, Jharkhand. 7. The Assistant Engineer, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Borio (Sahibganj), P.O and P.S. Borio, District Sahibganj, Jharkhand. 8. Bipin Kumar Singh, son of late Naresh Prasad Singh @ Naresh Singh, resident of village Gidhani, (Gamaharia), P.O Deopur, P.S. Jasidih, District- Deoghar. …... Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the petitioner(s): Mrs. Bakshi Vibha,Advocate. For the respondents Mrs. Moushmi Chatterjee, AC to GA-V. ------ 02/08.01.2026: Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner claims for compassionate appointment in lieu of death of his father. 3. From the documents, I find that the father of the petitioner died in a accident. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that he was also injured in the accident that is why for that period of time, he could not look after his mother, thus the ground which has been taken that he is not looking his mother therefore, he is not entitled for compassionate appointment, is bad. 5. The rejection order clearly suggests that the mother appeared before the Committee and stated that it is Bipin Kumar Singh who is looking after her and not this petitioner. Considering the aforesaid fact, the respondents are considering to appoint Bipin Kumar Singh after giving necessary age relaxation as per law. 6. Considering the impugned order, I find that the mother has clearly stated that this petitioner is not looking after his mother. Thus, I find no ground to interfere with the impugned order. 7. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. 8th January, 2026 (ANANDA SEN, J.) Anu/-Cp2. Uploaded on: 09.01.2026.