1 ( 2026:JHHC:3400-DB ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P. A. No. 720 of 2025 With I.A. No. 6475 of 2025 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Election, having office at Project Building, Dhurva, Post & PS- Dhurva, P.S.- Jagannathpur, District- Ranchi-834004. 2. The Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Election Officer, Seraikela- Kharswan, Post & P.S. & District- Seraikela-833219. 3. Sub-Divisional Officer Chandil, Post & P.S.-Chandil, District- Seraikela-Kharswan. 4. The Circle Officer, Chandil, Post & PS.- Chandil, District- Seraikela- Kharswan. 5. The State Election Commission, through Chief Election Commissioner, having office at Nirvachan Bhavan, New Market Chowk, Post-Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdeo Nagar, District- Ranchi. 6. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Seraikela-Kharswan, At & Post & P.S.- Seraikela-833219. …. Appellants Versus 1. Amala Murmu wife of Jairam Manjhi, resident of Village- Bhadudih, Post- Bhadudih, P.S.- Chandil, District- Seraikela-Kharswan. 2. Gurupada Hansda, son of Haldhar Hansda, resident of Saharbera, Post- Chainpur, P.S.- Chandil, District- Seraikela-Kharswan. …. Respondents ------ CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ------ For the Appellants : Mr. Aditya Raman, AC to GA-III ----- 2/ 09.02.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants-State. 2. I.A. No. 6475 of 2025, seeks condonation of delay of 395 days in instituting this L.P.A. against the learned Single Judge’s judgment and order dated 22.11.2023 in W.P.(C) No. 3363 of 2023. 3. There is no proper explanation for this inordinate delay. The fact that the delay is ordinate is explicitly accepted in paragraph-14 of the I.A. Besides, against the learned Single Judge’s decision, the original respondent no.3 Gurupada Hansda had filed L.P.A. No. 50 of 2024, which has already been dismissed by order of 23rd April, 2024. 2 4. Learned counsel for the State contended that such dismissal was without hearing the State Government. 5. On perusing the Co-ordinate Bench’s order dated 23rd April, 2024, we find that the same was based on the peculiar facts of the present case and therefore, we do not think that any point of law as such has been decided. In any event, since no sufficient cause has been shown, we dismiss I.A., seeking condonation of delay and consequently the accompanying letters patent appeal. No cost. (M.S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) February 09, 2026 Ranjeet / R.Kr. Uploaded on 11.02.2026