2026:JHHC:7372 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1678 of 2026 Daywislay Nagvanshi, son of Bishwanath Sahu, resident of village Sijang, P.O.- Lochragarh, P.S. Kolebira Sijang, District- Simdega. ....Petitioner(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary of the School Education and Literacy Department, MDI Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 3. The Director (Primary Education) of the School Education and Literacy Department, MDI Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 4. The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, at Chaibagan Gali, Kali Nagar, Namkum, Ranchi. 5. The Regional Deputy Director of the Education, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi. 6. The District Education Superintendent, Simdega. …Respondent(s). ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Subhodh Kr. Pandey, Advocate For the State : AC to AG For JSSC : M/s Sanjoy Piprawall, Prince Kumar & Jay Prakash, Advocates. ------ 02/17.03.2026: Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner appeared for counselling process purusant to Advertisement No. 13/2023 published for selection of Intermediate Trained Sahayak Aacharya for Class-I to Class-V. 3. After the petitioner appeared for counselling, some discrepancies were detected by the respondents in the documents of the petitioner, for which, the impugned notice pertaining to Memo No. 1813 dated 24.10.2025 was issued to the petitioner. The notice contains the objections, which have been raised. Further in the notice, the petitioner was directed to appear in person to satisfy the respondents about the query which has been raised by them along with sufficient documents. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitoner has appeared before the authority and by the help of documents and evidence, he has satisfied the respondents but the respondents has yet to pass the order. 5. Considering the said submission, since the petitioner has already filed a detailed reply and has appeared before the respondents, I direct the respondents to give one more opportunity to the petitioner to explain his case before the District Superintendent of Education, Simdega, if no final order has been passed. The respondents are directed to pass final order after hearing the petitioner and considering the explanation given by the petitioner, preferably within a period of six weeks. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. March 17, 2026 Anu/- Cp2. Uploaded: 19.3.2026 (ANANDA SEN, J.) Page No. 1