2026:JHHC:11713 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 2436 of 2026 ---------- 1. Anjana Singh, aged about 58 years, W/o Late Shailendra Kumar Singh, resident of A-4, Durga Apartment, Kilburn Colony, Hinoo, P.O. & P.S.- Doranda, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) 2. Binay Kumar Singh, aged about 42 years, son of Late Sunil Kumar Singh, resident of Quarter No.30/56 Set, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) ………. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Labour Employment, Training and Skill Development, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) 2. The Secretary, Department of Planning-cum-Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand). 3. The Chief Inspector of Factories, having its office at Labour Building, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Labour Building, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand). ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioners : M/s. Saurabh Shekhar, Anurag Kumar, Dhruva Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Suresh Kumar, SC(L&C)-II Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, AC to SC(L&C)-II ---------- 02/21.04.2026 The instant writ application has been filed for following reliefs: (i) For issuance of appropriate writ (s), order (s), direction(s), particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to grant the benefit of MACPs to the petitioners, in the absence of passing of departmental examination, and in view of the mandate as has been settled vide Govt. resolution, dated 01.09.2009 (Annexure-1), on completion of the requisite period and in light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, passed in the case of Sri Amresh Kumar Singh & Ors., Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors., reported in (2023) SCC OnLine SC, 496; (ii) For issuance of appropriate writ (s), order (s), direction(s). particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to allow and fix the following grade-pays to the petitioners, on the basis of the grant of benefit of MACP, in the manner as prayed herein below:- Petitioners Date of Appointment and pay-scale Date of 1st MACP and Grade-Pay Date of 2nd MACP and grade-pay Petitioner No. 1 14.05.2007 Rs.3050-75-4590 14.05.2017 Rs.2000 - Petitioner No. 2 10.02.2003 Rs.4000-100-6000 10.02.2013 Rs.2800 10.02.2023 Rs.4200 2026:JHHC:11713 2 (iii) For issuance of appropriate writ (s), order (s), direction (s), particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to fix the higher grade-pay, as per the MACP benefits, to be granted to the petitioners and further to release the entire arrears of salary on the basis of calculation of pay in the improved grade-pay/pay-scale. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent-authorities may be directed to pass an appropriate order with regard to prayer of the petitioners without getting prejudiced from the fact that petitioners have not passed the departmental examination in view of the fact that the issue of passing the departmental examination is not necessary for ACP/MACP benefits as the same has been set at rest in the case of Amresh Kumar Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.1. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that since counter-affidavit has not been filed, hence, the petitioners shall move before the 2nd respondent for redressal of their grievances. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case though it is the matter of 2026 but this Court feels that there is no need of any counter-affidavit because the representation is pending before the department and the law is also well settled that on account of non-passing of the departmental examination, employee cannot be denied the benefits of ACP/MACP. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the respondent No. 2 to treat this writ application as representation and take decision with regard to the claim made by the respective petitioners in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations and also in view of the law laid by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Amresh Kumar Singh (supra), by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. One of the petitioners is directed to serve a copy of this writ application to the concerned respondent so that their grievances can be redressed at the earliest. 1 2023 SCC OnLine SC 496 2026:JHHC:11713 3 7. If the decision is taken in favour of the petitioners, the consequential benefits shall be given to them within a further period of 4 weeks. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 21st April, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded on 04.05.2026