( 2026:JHHC:12349-DB ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 136 of 2026 1. Krishna Kumar Mishra, aged 82 years, son of Late Sudarshan Mishra, resident of Town 2, Near Railway Colony, Daltanganj P.Ο. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 2. Tunuka Debi, aged about 77 years, Widow of Late J.K. Sharma, resident of Paki Road, Near Lotus Academy P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 3. Sheela Goel, aged about 78 years, widow of Late Bipin Bihari Sharan, resident of Balbhati, Panki Road, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 4. Indu Devi, aged about 80 years, widow of Late R.K. Singh, resident of Panki Road near Charki Chatta, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 5. Sushil Kumar Choudhary, aged about 88 years, Son of Late Kailash Choudhary, resident of Panki Road, Redma, P.O. and P.S.- Daltonganj, District Palamau. 6. Maheshwar Singh, aged about 79 years, Son of Late Sahdeo Singh, resident of Bye Pass Road, P.O. and P.S.- Daltonganj, District Palamau. 7. Rameshwar Prasad, aged about 81 years, Son of Late Rajiv Ranjan Prasad, resident of near Jail Hata, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 8. Manorama Devi, aged about 78 years, Widow of Late Deo Narayan Lal, resident of Balbhatta Panki Road, P.O. and P.S.-Daltonganj, District Palamau. 9. Raja Devi, aged about 75 years, widow of Shobh Nath Mistri, resident of Bye Pass Road, Near Satkar Bhawan, P.O. and P.S.-Daltonganj, District Palamau. 10. Subodh Devi, aged about 82 years, widow of Late Dinesh Prasad, resident of Abadganj P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 11. Rajiv Kumar Srivastava, aged about 81 years, Son of Umesh Chandra Prasad, resident of Abadganj P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 12. Kamla Kant Mishra, aged about 84 years, Son of Late Maheshwar Prasad Mishra, near Jail Hata, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 13. Daya Shankar Srivastava, aged about 79 years, Son of Late Sugriv Lal Srivastava, resident of Shahid Azam Bhagat Singh Nagar, Town No.2, Road No.4, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 14. Subhash Chandra Mishra, aged about 80 years, Son of Late Tapeshwar Mishra, resident of Sri Ram Path, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 15. Hira Lal Agarwal, aged about 81 years, Son of Late Chaturgun Lal Agarwal, resident of near Uphar Cinema, Ratu Road, P.O. and P.S. Ratu, District Ranchi. 16. Eva Srivastava, aged about 78 years, Wife of Sri Shankar Srivastava, resident of Shahid Azam Bhagat Singh Nagar, Town No.2, Road No.4, P.O. and P.S.-Daltonganj, District Palamau. 17. Nirmal Kumar Dubey, aged about 78 years, Son of Late Ram Naresh Dubey, resident of B.N. College Road, New Area, Hamidganj, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 18. Lalita Devi, aged about 81 years, widow Late Basudeo Prasad, resident of B.N. College Road, New Area, Hamidganj, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 19. Digamber Singh, aged about 76 years, Son of Late Arjun Singh, resident of Charki Bhatta, Panki Road, P.O. and P.S.-Daltonganj, District Palamau. ( 2026:JHHC:12349-DB ) 2 20. Krishna Nandan, aged about 76 years, Son of late Jaigobind Sharma, resident of Charki Bhatta, Panki Road, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. …. …. Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Planning cum Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, P.O. Dhurwa P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi. 3. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. 4. The Director, Higher Education, Department of Higher and Technical Education, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi. 5. The Under Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. 6. The Ranchi University, Ranchi through its Registrar, having its office at Main Road, P.O.-GPO, P.S.- Lower Bazar, District- Ranchi. 7. The Nilamber Pitamber University through its Registrar, having its office at Daltonganj, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. … ... Respondents ------ CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ------ For the Appellants : Mrs Indrani Sen Choudhary, Advocate For the Resp-State : Mr Gaurav Raj, AC to AAG-II For the Resp-RU : Mr Anoop Kumar Mehta, Advocate Mr Amit Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Resp-NPU : Mr Radha Krishna Gupta, Advocate Mrs Pinky Shaw, Advocate ----- 03 /Dated: 28.04.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. With the consent of and at the request of the learned counsel for the parties, we have heard this appeal finally and we proceed to dispose of the same. 3. This appeal is directed against the learned Single Judge’s order dated 19.08.2024 disposing of W.P.(S) No. 3538 of 2023 instituted by the appellants herein for giving them the pensionary benefits of the 7th Pay Revision Commission from 01.01.2016 instead of 01.04.2021 together with interest from the date it fell due till the date of actual payment. ( 2026:JHHC:12349-DB ) 3 4. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge did not either grant or reject the petitioners’ reliefs that they were seeking in W.P.(S) No. 3538 of 2023. Instead, the learned Single Judge directed the respondent-State to take a policy decision with regard to payment of arrears of revised pension under the 7th Pay Revision Commission with effect from 01.01.206 within a period of three months from the date of the order, which is now impugned before us. 5. Mrs Indrani Sen Choudhary, learned counsel for the appellants heavily relied upon the decision of yet another learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters, which were disposed of on 05.08.2024. She submitted that there was no difference in the claims of the petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters and the present appellants. She submitted that upon considering the rival contentions, the learned Single Judge, in its order dated 05.08.2024, directed the respondents to grant the petitioners in the said matters arrears of pensionary benefits under the 6th Pay Revision Commission with effect from 01.01.2026 together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date such amounts became payable till the actual payments. Financial benefits were also granted. 6. Mrs Choudhary submitted that even the appellants in the present appeal are entitled to the same reliefs because their cases and claims are identical to those in W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters. 7. Considering the above submission, which was first made on 07.04.2026, we passed the following order on 07.04.2026: - “1. Mrs. I. Sen Choudhary, the learned counsel for the appellants, relying on the judgment and order dated 5th August, 2024 disposing of W.P.(S) No.5187 of 2022 and connected matters submits that by this judgment arrears of pension together with interest @ 6% per annum was awarded to the University employees. ( 2026:JHHC:12349-DB ) 4 2. Mr. Piyush Chitresh, the learned A.C. to A.G. seeks some time to obtain instructions on the status of appeal, if any, against the judgment and order dated 5th August, 2024 in W.P.(S) No.5187 of 2022 and connected matters. 3. We post this matter on 28th April, 2026 “High on Board”. 8. Mr Gaurav Raj, learned AC to AAG-II, did not seriously dispute that the appellants’ case was similar to that of the petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters. He, however, pointed out that the State had filed an LPA against the learned Single Judge’s order dated 05.08.2024, which has since been dismissed for default. He pointed out that a restoration application has also been filed and is pending consideration. 9. In this case, we are concerned with the pensionary benefits payable to retired employees. On perusing the learned Single Judge's order dated 05.08.2024 in W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters, we are satisfied that the positions and claims of the present appellants are almost identical to those of the petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters. Therefore, based upon the learned Single Judge’s order dated 05.08.2024, even the present appellants should have been granted the same reliefs, instead of the earlier direction to the Government to take a policy decision within three months on the issue and claims raised by the present appellants. 10. The State preferred an LPA against the learned Single Judge’s order dated 05.08.2024, but the same has been dismissed for default. We are informed that the restoration application is pending. The fate of all such proceedings are unknown. At least, prima facie, it is apparent that the State, if indeed aggrieved by the learned Single Judge’s order dated 05.08.2024, has not taken any diligent steps regarding that order. ( 2026:JHHC:12349-DB ) 5 11. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to require the present appellants to wait almost indefinitely for the proceedings against the order dated 05.08.2024 to reach a conclusion. Given the pendency of such proceedings, which do not appear to be diligently pursued, the State and other respondents in this petition cannot deny the appellants the same benefits as were granted to the petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters vide order dated 05.08.2024. 12. As it is, in matters after matters, we note that the State simply appeals the learned Single Judges’ orders and, citing pendency of such appeals, without securing any interim orders, refuses or delays implementation of the learned Single Judges’ orders unreasonably. Most often, such appeals are filed after the expiry of the limitation period and with several defects. The idea appears to be to simply keep such matters pending and plead that as an excuse against implementation. 13. Therefore, by following the reasoning in the order dated 05.08.2024 disposing of W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters, we interfere with the learned Single Judge’s impugned order and direct that the respondents grant them within a period of eight weeks from today, the same benefits as were granted by the order dated 05.08.2024 to the petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 5187 of 2022 and connected matters. 14. This Letters Patent Appeal is allowed to the above extent, without any order for costs. (M.S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) April 28, 2026 Ranjeet / R.Kr. NAFR Uploaded on 28.04.2026