Manish Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024

¶4

---

¶5

Prakash Kumar, son of Nand Kishore Poddar, resident of Village, P.O. & P.S.- Itkhori, District- Chatra

¶6

Shyam Kumar, son of Triloky Mistri, resident of Sindwar Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Namkum, District- Ranchi

¶7

… … Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Jharkhand

¶10

The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶11

The Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi through its Chairman

¶12

The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi

¶13

The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi

¶14

The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶15

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi

¶16

The Officer-In-Charge, Sadar Police Station, Kokar Industrial Area, Kokar, Ranchi

¶17

…. … Respondents

¶18

With

¶19

W.P.(S) No. 1476 of 2025

¶20

---

¶21

Manish Kumar, son of Bhardul Ram, resident of Village & P.O.- Sangbariya, P.S.- Meral, District- Garhwa.

¶22

Akhilesh Kumar, son of Kedar Saw, resident of Village- Pipra, P.O.- Narchahi, P.S.- Itkhroi, & District- Chatra.

¶23

Chandan Kumar Roy, son of Dharam Narayan Roy, resident of Village-Chandraydih, P.O.- Taranakho, P.S.- Dhanwar & District- Giridih.

¶24

Kaushal Kumar, son of Raman Kumar Singh, resident of Village- Bela, P.O.- Hafua, P.S.- Chatra, & District- Chatra.

¶25

Suchit Kumar Ray, son of Sakaldeo Ray, resident of VillageManodih, P.O.- Kubri, P.S.- Dhanwar, & District- Giridih.

¶26

Sunita Kispotta, daughter of Khaddi Kispotta, resident of Tuko, P.O & P.S.- Bero, District- Ranchi.

¶27

Rahul Kumar, son of Sushil Kumar Mehta, resident of Khurra, P.O. & P.S.- Barwadih, & District- Latehar.

¶28

Vijay Kumar Mahto, son of Chintu Mahto resident of VillageHarilagora, P.O.- Dudhigazar, P.S.- Chas & District- Bokaro.

¶29

Pankaj Kumar Saha, son of Raj Kumar Saha, resident of Udhwa, P.O.- Udhwa, P.S.- Radhanagar & District- Sahibganj.

¶30

Sanket Kumar Saha, son of Raj Kumar Saha, resident of Udhwa, P.O.- Udhwa, P.S.- Radhanagar & District- Sahibganj.

¶31

Ram Chandra Mandal, son of Kamleshwar Mandal, resident

¶32

¶33

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶34

of Village- Mahtodih, P.O.- Matrukha, P.S. & District- Giridih.

¶35

Premlal Thakur, son of Lila Hazam, resident of VillageKumaharlalo, P.O., P.S. & District- Giridih.

¶36

Ashish Kumar, son of Basudev Mehta, resident of Dumraon, P.O., P.S. & District-Hazaribagh.

¶37

Rohit Kumar Singh, son of Ashok Singh, resident of Sinbghpur, P.O., P.S. & District- Hazaribagh.

¶38

Hafij Ansari, son of Urma Ansari, resident of Haril, Kumba Toli, P.O., P.S. Ranchi & District- Ranchi.

¶39

Sanjar Shakeel, son of Shakeel Akhtar, resident of near Pathalkudwa Masjid, Deputy Lane Pathalkudwa, P.O., G.P.O.Ranchi, P.S- Sukhdeonagar, District- Ranchi.

¶40

Surendra Kumar, son of Kripal Hazam, resident of Village, P.O. & P.S- Nutandih & District- Bokaro.

¶41

MD Moshim Ansari, son of Shekh Khadim Rasul, resident of Ward No. 2, Village- Sangrahe Khurd, P.O. Sangrahe, P.S. & District – Garhwa

¶42

Masud Alam, son of Anish Ahmad, resident of Ward No. 6, Village –Meral, P.O.- Meral, P.S. & District –Garhwa.

¶43

Abhishek Kumar, son of Om Prakash Thakur, resident of Village & P.O.- Makka, District – Ranchi.

¶44

Satish Kumar Gupta, son of Shiv Kumar Gupta, resident of Ward No. 1, Village Tenar, P.O., P.S. & District – Garhwa.

¶45

Pradeep Kullu, son of Ignatius Kullu, resident of VillageKesra, P.O.- T. Tangar, P.S.-Ghutbahar, District – Simdega.

¶46

Sujit Hembrom, son of Shyamlal Hembrom, resident of Village & P.O.- Shahpur, P.S.-Beldiha, District – Godda.

¶47

Kunal Gaurav, son of Vijay Kumar Soni, resident of House No. 59, Main Road, P.O., P.S. Garhwa & District – Garhwa.

¶48

MD Parwej Alam, son of Akhtar Ansari, resident of Near Electric Poll, Kokdoro, P.O. & P.S.- Kanke , District-Ranchi.

¶49

Pankaj Kumar Mahto, son of Daleshwar Mahto, resident of Tola Bakhari, Village- Ahardih, Surhi, P.O, P.S. & DistrictBokaro.

¶50

Pappu Kumar Thakur, son of Dhaneshwar Thakur, resident of New Anandpur, Khijri, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi, District- Ranchi.

¶51

Govinda Kumar, son of Dashrath Kewat, resident of Near Hanuman Mandir, Makchund Toli, Chutia, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi , District – Ranchi.

¶52

Anisha Kumari, wife of Saban Baitha, resident of VillageBingaon, P.S. Kara & District – Khunti.

¶53

Ravi Shankar, son of Tipan Mahto, resident of Village Tantri South, P.O.- Tupkadih, P.S. Jaridih & District – Bokaro.

¶54

Amit Kumar Mahto, son of Rabindra Mahto, resident of Khijri Nayatoli, Namkum, P.O. & P.S. Ranchi , District – Ranchi.

¶55

Deepak Kumar Ram, son of Krishna Ram, resident of VillageMango, P.O.- Tantri, P.S. Bokaro & District – Bokaro.

¶56

Sanjay Kumar, son of Mantosh Mahto, resident of Hendebilli, P.O. & P.S.- Ormanjhi , District Ranchi.

¶57

Sonu Kumar, son of Bindeshwar Saw, resident of 180 EDLA, P.O. & P.S.- Chatra , District – Chatra.

¶58

¶59

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶60

Raj Vardhan Sinha, son of Raj Nandan Prasad Sinha, resident of Ashiana Heights, Oberiya Road, Chandani Chowk, Hatiya, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi , District- Ranchi

¶61

Dashrath Kumar Mahto, son of Ramlal Mahto, resident of Village- Sirka Nayatoli, P.O. Angara, P.S.- Ranchi & District – Ranchi

¶62

Santu Kumar, son of Saryu Ram, resident of VillageSohgara, P.O.- Shivpur, P.S. Kandi & District Garhwa

¶63

Vinod Kumar Mahto, son of Nemdhari Mahto, resident of Village- Soso, P.O. & P.S.- Ramgarh , District – Ramgarh

¶64

Rohit Ranjan, son of Dilip Kumar Singh, resident of VillageLututand, P.O.- Galgaltand, P.S.- Chandankiyari & District – Bokaro

¶65

Sandeep Kumar, son of Batul Chandra Mahto, resident of Village- Bhawanipur Side Kultand, P.O. & P.S.- Chas , District – Bokaro

¶66

Md Wasim Ansari, son of Md Islam Ansari, resident of Village- Dulidih, P.O. & P.S- Poraiyahat, & District –Godda.

¶67

Md Amzad Ali, son of Md Zakir Ali, resident of At/P.O.Phuljhanjhri, P.S.- Pakuria & District- Pakur.

¶68

Md Zahid, son of Md Najmuddin, resident of Line Muhalla, Khanqua Road, P.O., P.S & District- Chatra.

¶69

Prashant Oraon, son of Madi Oraon, resident of Nayasaray Aani, Tundiul, P.O. Murma Nayasarai, P.S.- Ranchi & District – Ranchi.

¶70

Md Islam Mian, son of Somar Miya, resident of Line Gram Kurumdiha, P.O.- Remba, P.S.- Hirodih, Dhuraita & District – Giridih.

¶71

Md Razauddin Ansari, son of Md Imtiyaz Ansari, resident of Champapur, P.O.-Chainpur, P.S. & District- Jamtara.

¶72

Rohit Choudhary, son of Prakash Choudhary, resident of Hariharpur, P.S.- Barwadda, P.O.-Panjania & District – Dhanbad.

¶73

Rohit Mishra, son of Abhay Mishra, resident of Raja Jenral Stor, Chitra Gupt Colony, Indrapuri, Hehal, P.O., P.S.- & District – Ranchi.

¶74

Shiv Shankar Prajapati, son of Baldev Prajapati, resident of Shankarpur Parsudih, Near Nehru Chowk, P.O.- Sarjamda, P.S & District - Purbi Singhbhum.

¶75

Ajay Kumar Yadav, son of Gupteshwar Prasad Yadav, resident of Village Deoria, P.O. & P.S.- Ghaghra, District – Ramgarh.

¶76

Kanchan Kumari, wife of Ajay Kumar Yadav, resident of Village - Shivnagar Pirra, P.O. - Pirra, P.S. - Ratu & District Ranchi.

¶77

Anil Kumar, son of Dubraj Munda, resident of Village- Bilari, P.O.- Bahera, P.S. & District- Chatra.

¶78

Mritunjay Verma, son of Arun Verma, resident of Near Kali Mandir, P.O. & P.S.- Shikaripara , District – Dumka.

¶79

Aditya Kumar Gupta, son of Devdhari Saw, resident of Village- Purnadih, P.O.- Lohandi, P.S. -Chouparan & District – Hazaribag.

¶80

¶81

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶82

Sanjit Bhagat, son of Laxmi Narayan Bhagat, resident of Torar Maina Toli, P.O.- Arru, P.S.- Senha & District– Lohardaga

¶83

Bidyasagar Bhagat, son of Parmeshwar Bhagat, resident of Village, P.O. & Panchayat-Danru, P.S.- Block-Senha & District – Lohardaga.

¶84

Ankesh Oraon, son of Jagmohan Oraon, resident of Village - Kasamar, P.O. & P.S.- Herhanj & District Chatra.

¶85

Sumit Pahan, son of Anil Pahan, resident of Village- Chakla, P.O. & P.S.- Ormanjhi & District – Ranchi.

¶86

Sagar Seth, son of Pannalal Seth, resident of VillageSarjamdih, P.O. Saejamdih, P.S.- Tamar & District – Ranchi

¶87

Randhir Kumar, son of Dhaneshwar Prasad Yadav, resident of Village- Kheshnaro, P.O.- Kahuwat, P.S.- Gawan & District – Giridih.

¶88

Ashish Munda, son of Mahendra Nath Munda, resident of Niche Toli Kamre, P.O.& P.S.- Ratu & District – Ranchi.

¶89

Brij Kishore Prasad, son of R.K. Prasad, resident of Lalganj, Mahuatoli, P.O.- Lalganj, P.S.- Ranchi & District – Ranchi.

¶90

Sanjit Kumar, son of Yogendra Prasad, resident of Jora Talab, P.O. & P.S.- Bariyatu, & District-Ranchi.

¶91

Bijendra Besra, son of Baidyanath Besra, resident of Panchayat- Chhotadawna, P.O.- Tablapur, P.S.- Akhinathpur & District- Serailela-kharsawan.

¶92

Pranit Mishra, son of Dwarika Nath Mishra, resident of Near Water Ways Gate, Jawahar Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Gumla & District – Gumla.

¶93

Praveen Kumar Mishra, son of Dwarika Nath Mishra, resident of Near Water Ways Gate, Jawahar Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Gumla & District – Gumla.

¶94

Runel Kerketta, son of Ruben Sunil Kerketta, resident of H.O.52, Road No. 3, P.O & P.S. – Jagannathpur, District – Ranchi.

¶95

Mahesh Baghwar, son of Bawna Baghwar, resident of Sama Toli, P.O., P.S. & District – Gumla.

¶96

Priytam Kumar Gupta, son of Madhusudan Sahu, resident of Village- Barlanga, Near Railway Line, P.O. & P.S.- Barlanga & District – Ramgarh.

¶97

Gyandev Kisku, son of Bhola Kisku, resident of VillageAmarpur, P.O.- Pathra, P.S.- Godda & District – Godda

¶98

Krishna Kumar Oraon, son of Lalbir Oraon, resident of Village- Chatti, P.O.- Adar, P.S- Ghaghra & District – Gumla.

¶99

Raj Kumar Rajesh, son of Lekha Mistri, resident of Line Muhalla, Pansawla, Near Ara Machine, P.O. & P.S.- Chatra , District – Chatra.

¶100

Md Irfanul Wala Quadry, son of Md Montinuddin Shah, resident of Village- Unchari, P.O. & P.S.- Garhwa , District – Garhwa.

¶101

Surajit Nayak, son of Pashupati Nayak, resident of Village - Sarsabera, P.O. & P.S.-Ram Chandra Pur & District- East Singhbhum.

¶102

Vijay Kumar Das, son of Maneshwar Das, resident of Ward No. 5, Kenman Kathi, Ghaghi, P.O. & P.S.- Jasidih & District –

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

Deoghar.

Navin Kumar Mishra, son of Madhu Sudhan Mishra, resident of Kasidih, P.O.- Lagam, P.S. & District – Ranchi.

¶107

Sushil Kumar, son of Ghuran Lohra, resident of VillageDumardih, P.O.- Lasia, P.S. - Kolebira & District – Simdega.

¶108

Rakhi Kumari, daughter of Radheshyam Singh, resident of Village- New Colony, Panchayat- Tajpur, P.O. & P.S. Chouparan, District – Hazaribagh.

¶109

Priyanka Kumari, daughter of Ramphal Bedia, resident of Village – Nimi, P.O., P.S. & District – Ramgarh.

¶110

Trilochan Mahto, son of Shivnath Mahto, resident of Village - Kareyadih, P.O. - Patrahatu, P.S. & District-Ranchi.

¶111

Shashi Kant Gope, son of Kanchu Gope, resident of Village - Chatakpur, P.O.- Tetri, P.S.- Namkum & District – Ranchi.

¶112

Manoj Kumar Mahato, son of Bhuneshwar Prasad Mahato, resident of Near Middle School, Gendnawdih, P.O. & P.S.Tantri & District – Dhanbad.

¶113

Neelam Kumari, daughter of Mohan Lal Mahto, resident of P.O.- Turmuli, P.S.- Burmu, Village - Geswe, P.O. - Brambe & District – Ranchi.

¶114

Reeta Kumari, daughter of Manga Oraon, resident of VillageChardi, P.O.- Kumhariya, P.S.- Pithoria & District – Ranchi.

¶115

Ashutosh Kumar Deo, son of Abhay Kumar Deo, resident of Village- Nawadih & District Deoghar.

¶116

Anup Kumar Mahto, son of Shashadhar Mahto, resident of Village - Basahatu, P.O.- B. Nawadih, P.S. - Sonahatu & District – Ranchi.

¶117

Sonu Sahu, son of Dhaneshwar Sahu, resident of VillageKachmachi & District- Lohardaga.

¶118

Reshma Topno, daughter of Rijha Topno, resident of P.O. & P.S.- Karra, Village- Masmano & District- Khunti.

¶119

Raj Kishor Mehta, son of Dharm Nath Mahto, resident of Village- Telmunga, Tola Churingadha, P.O. & P.S. Kasmar, District – Bokaro.

¶120

Sanjay Kumar Sahu, son of Dilesh Chandra Sahu, resident of Village & P.O.- Sakra, P.S.- Mandar & District – Ranchi.

¶121

Khushboo Kumari, daughter of Rajesh Singh, resident of Village- Singharawan, P.O. & P.S.- Narchahi & District – Hazaribagh

¶122

Deepak Kumar Nayak, son of Basant Nayak, resident of 26A, Urmi Tira Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Tirra & District – Gumla.

¶123

Mahendra Sahu, son of Prashant Kumar Sahu, resident of P.O. & P.S.- Kolabira, Panchayat- Muria & District- SeraikelaKharsawan.

¶124

Tulsi Mahato, daughter of Satish Mahato, resident of VillageSindri, P.O. & P.S.- Rangamati & District – Dhanbad.

¶125

Prem Kumar Bhagat, son of Basram Bhagat, resident of Village- Sabano, P.O. & P.S.- Udaypura & District- Latehar.

¶126

Anjni Kumari, daughter of Gandura Oraon, resident of P.O.Tilmi, Village- Bamarja, P.S. & District – Khunti.

¶127

Muneshwar Mahto, son of Surpati Mahto, resident of P.O. & P.S.-Jurdag, Village- Asanmanri & District- Khunti.

¶128

¶129

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶130

Anil Mahto, son of Ram .i Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.Ammapakana, P.S.- Torpa & District – Khunti.

¶131

Nimay Kumar Dubey, son of Ram Chandra Dubey, resident of Village- Sirsagarh, P.O.- Singdaha, P.S.- Topchanchi & District- Dhanbad.

¶132

Amar Abhishek Minj, son of Sudhir Minj, resident of Village-Sosai, P.O. & P.S.-Sosai Ashram, Tehsil - Mandar & District- Ranchi.

¶133

Pawan Kumar, son of Sakaldeep Prajapati, resident of Village- Sinduriya, P.O.- Sinduriya, P.S.- Daltonganj & DistrictPalamu.

¶134

Mumtaz Ahamad, son of Abdul Quddus, resident of Village- Balsokra, P.O- Balsokra, P.S.- Chanho & DistrictRanchi.

¶135

Anand Mohan, son of Ajit Kumar Singh, resident of Village - Chanaigir, P.O.- Getha, P.S. Lesliganj & District – Palamu.

¶136

Navnit Kumar Das, son of Sanjay Kumar Das, resident of Village- Soparam, P.O.- Koed, P.S.- Tandwa & District – Chatra.

¶137

Sonu Kumar Verma, son of Binod Swarnkar, resident of 839, Khudgadda, P.O. & P.S.- Gomia & District – Bokaro.

¶138

Ajay Tirkey, son of Poulus Tirkey, resident of VillageBagantoli, P.O.- Jonha, P.S.- Angara & District- Ranchi.

¶139

Binod Kumar, Son of Lt Rimish Oraon, resident of VillageKumbatoli, P.O. Telgaon, P.S. - Gumla & District – Gumla.

¶140

Madan Pradhan, son of Mohari Gangjhu, resident of Village- Renchi, P.O.- Barikhep, P.S. Balumath & District – Latehar.

¶141

Nakul Kumar, son of Mohari Gangjhu, resident of VillageRenchi, P.O.- Barikhep, P.S.- Balumath & District – Latehar.

¶142

Santosh Kumar Mandal, son of Ganpat Mandal, resident of Village- Karudih, P.O.- Karudih, P.S.- Ramgarh & District – Dumka.

¶143

Surendra Turi, son of Devlal Turi, resident of VillageSarwindha, P.O.- Bara, P.S.- Banjhi & District-Godda.

¶144

Nitin Anupam, son of Amrendra Prasad Verma, resident of Goushala Road, P.O.- Dhundani, P.S.- Dumka & District – Dumka.

¶145

Mikky Kumari, daughter of Pramod Kumar Ray, resident of Village- Jagatpur, P.O.- Amrapahari, P.S.- Ramgarh & District – Dumka.

¶146

Amitesh Bhandari, son of Nishikant Bhandari, resident of Ward No. 11, Post Office Road, P.O.- Satsangh Nagar, P.S.Godda & District – Godda.

¶147

Ujjwal Kumar Sah, son of Chandra Shekhar Pd Sah, resident of Village- Dhoba, P.O. & P.S.-Ramgarh & District– Dumka.

¶148

Dharmendra Kumar, son of Sahdev Sah, resident of Village - Sanmani, P.O.- Rohra, P.S.-Sahebganj & DistrictSahebganj.

¶149

Ritesh Kumar Thakur, son of Jaykant Thakur, resident of Village- Khojwa, P.O.- Chilra, P.S.- Dumka & District – Dumka.

¶150

¶151

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶152

Krishna Mirdha, son of Mantu Mirdha, resident of House No. 143, P.O.- Karayachak, P.S.-Bindapathar & District – Jamtara.

¶153

Sonalal Pandit, son of Rajendra Pandit, resident of Village - Jay Nagar Piper Joriya, P.O. - Nunbatta, P.S.- Nunbatta & District – Godda.

¶154

Pravin Kumar, Son of Bhairo Saw, resident of VillageJabda, P.O.- Jabra, P.S.- Chatra & District- Chatra.

¶155

Pawan Kumar, son of Birbal Rana, resident of VillageSabano, P.O.- Sabona, P.S.- Chatra & District- Chatra.

¶156

Manoj Kumar Ram, son of Lal Deo Ram, resident of Village & P.O.- Ganeshpur, P.S. Balumath & District – Latehar.

¶157

Pappu Kumar, son of Suresh Prajapati, resident of Village - Bhandaria, P.O. & P.S.- Bhandaria , District – Garhwa.

¶158

Manish Kumar Saw, son of Wajir Saw, resident of Dumardaga, P.O.- N.V.V. Buti, P.S.- Ranchi & District-Ranchi

¶159

Ajit Kumar, son of Bisheshwar Yadav, resident of Village - Gawan, P.O. & P.S. - Gawan , District – Giridih.

¶160

Shatrudhan Kumar, son of Suresh Pandit, resident of Village - Madangundi, P.O. & P.S.- Chandwara , District – Koderma.

¶161

Sandeep Mandal, son of Nunulal Mandal, resident of Village- Khawa, P.O.- Rani Khawa, P.S.- Pachamba & District – Giridih.

¶162

Vikash Kumar, son of Birendra Prasad, resident of Near Durga Mandir, P.O.- Chainpur P.S.- Mandu & DistrictRamgarh.

¶163

Krishna Ram, son of Devraj Ram, resident of VillageSabauna, P.O.& P.S.- Rehla , District – Palamu.

¶164

Dev Kumar Mahto, son of Bhuneshwar Mahto, resident of Village- Sukri Garha, P.O. & P.S.- Lari , District- Ramgarh.

¶165

Dileep Kumar, son of Kedar Mahto, resident of VillageSukri Garha, P.O. & P.S.- Lari, District – Ramgarh.

¶166

Ramesh Kumar Mahto, son of Deonath Mahto, resident of Village- Upar Tola, P.O.& P.S.- Patratu Tps, District – Ramgarh.

¶167

Vinod Khalkho, son of Chamu Khalkho, resident of House No. 107, P.O.&P.S.-Chakradharpur, District - West Singhbhum.

¶168

Piyush Kumar, son of Deepak Kumar, resident of Main Road near Sadar Hospital, P.O.- Chandandih, P.S.- Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶169

Anup Pandey, son of Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, resident of Chandandih, P.O.- Chandandih, P.S.- Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶170

Manju Bek, daughter of Bhola Oraon, resident of Jay Narayan Bhagat, P.O.- Makka P.S.- Lohardaga & District – Lohardaga.

¶171

Manoj Kumar, son of Vinod Prasad, resident of Village - Banpur, P.O.& P.S.- Latehar , District – Latehar

¶172

Priyanka Kumari, daughter of Sitaram Singh, resident of Village - Tasu, P.O.- - Tasu Herhanj, P.S. -Balu & District – Latehar

¶173

¶174

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶175

Anuj Kumar Ram, son of Mahesh Ram, resident of Village, P.O. & P.S - Ganeshpur, District – Latehar.

¶176

Pankaj Paswan, son of Ram Chalitar Manjhi, resident of Village, P.O. & P.S.- Manika , District – Latehar.

¶177

Shubham Kumar Mishra, son of Deepak Kumar Mishra, resident of Village & P.O.- Pungi, P.S.- Ranchi & District – Ranchi.

¶178

Navin Prakash, son of Indu Mahto, resident of Village - Berho, P.O. & P.S. - Tatijharia , District – Hazaribagh.

¶179

Sonu Kumar Yadav, son of Pradeep Kumar Yadav, resident of Village- Devi Mandap Road, P.O.- Latehar RS, P.S.- Bajkum & District – Latehar.

¶180

Deepak Kumar, son of Binod Prasad Jaiswal, resident of Village- Bichalidag, P.O.- Matnog, P.S.- Latehar & DistrictLatehar.

¶181

Prakash Ram, son of Ashok Ram, resident of VillageJubilee Road Banpur, P.O.- Banpur, P.S. - Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶182

Faijan Alam, son of Shamim, resident of VillageAmwatikar, P.O.- Amwatikar, P.S.- Latehar & District Latehar.

¶183

Arvind Kumar Singh, son of Chandra Kishore Singh, resident of Village- Bhilma, P.O. & P.S.- Semaura , District – Garhwa.

¶184

Nabab Alam, son of Shekh Md Salimuddin, resident of Village & P.O.- Adar, P.S. - Manjiaon , District – Garhwa.

¶185

Rijwan Ansari, son of Reyasat Ansari, resident of Village - Jatro Banjari, P.O- Adar, P.S. - Bardiha & District – Garhwa.

¶186

Sunil Kumar Yadav, son of Krishna Yadav, resident of Village- Cheri, P.O.- Dabra, P.S.- Lesliganj & District – Palamu

¶187

Dhirendra Kumar Yadav, son of Banarsi Yadav, resident of Village- Guasarai, P.O.- Kajru Khurd, P.S.- Pandu & District - Palamu, Jharkhand..

¶188

Nitish Kumar, son of Chhathan Manjhi, resident of Village & P.O.- Konwai, P.S.- Panki & District -Palamu, Jharkhand.

¶189

Mukesh Kumar Yadav, son of Mandev Yadav, resident of Village- Kasiyad (Lapsera), P.O.- Ratnag, P.S-. Pandu & District - Palamu, Jharkhand..

¶190

Sanjit Kumar, son of Jagrnath Yadav, resident of VillageSimarsot, P.O.- Kukhi, P.S.- Haidarnagar & District - Palamu, Jharkhand..

¶191

Pankaj Kumar, son of Raj Muni Mehata, resident of VillageSudana, P.O.& P.S.- Medininagar & District -Palamu, Jharkhand.

¶192

Abhinav Kumar, son of Suresh Mahto, resident of New Railway Crossing, Village- Sudana, P.S. & P.O.-Medininagar & District - Palamu, Jharkhand.

¶193

Sandip Oraon, son of Nageshwar Oraon, resident of Village- Madhaniya, Toil, P.O.- Besra, P.S.-Toli & District - Latehar, Jharkhand.

¶194

Sukhlal Lohra, son of Late Sanika Lohra, resident of Village- Kajibaru, P.O.- Humta, P.S.- Bundu & District- Ranchi,

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

Jharkhand.

Vikash Yadav, son of Yugeshwar Yadav, resident of BlockHerhanj, Village- Bandua, P.O. & P.S.- Serendag & District - Latehar, Jharkhand.

¶199

Arjun Vishwakarma, son of Premlal Vishwakarma, resident of Village- PNM College, At-Kheshmi, P.O.- Gomo, P.S.Topchanchi, District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand..

¶200

Paritosh Kumar Choudhary, son of Tripurari Choudhary, resident of Village- Merakhogundi, P.O.-Fulchi, P.S.- Taratand & District - Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶201

Prince Kumar, son of Nageshwar Prasad, resident of New Area, Buxidih Road, P.O. & P.S.- Giridih, District - Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶202

Vipin Kumar, son of Bahadur Roy, resident of VillageKhoto, P.O.- Chatro, P.S.- Deori & District - Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶203

Ajay Kumar Roy, son of Brahmdeo Roy, resident of VillagePrawatudih, P.O. & P.S.-Deori & District - Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶204

Manjay Kumar, son of Shivshankar Mandal, resident of Village- Barany, P.O. & P.S.- Kesodih & District-Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶205

Laljit Kumar, son of Bhuneshwar Yadav, resident of Village- Baidapahari, P.O. - Gadi Bharkatta, P.S. –Birni & District - Giridih, Jharkhand..

¶206

Rahul Kumar, son of Mithilesh Prasad Kushwaha, resident of Village- Baragadha Kala, P.O.- Leda, P.S. & District - Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶207

Chhatradhari Kumar Mandal, son of Rameshwar Mandal, resident of Village - Rakaskutto, P.O.- Mandro, P.S. – Gandey & District - Giridih, Jharkhand..

¶208

Anil Rana, son of Bnij Rana, resident of Village- Koldih, P.O.- Phuljhariya, P.S. – Ahilyapur & District- Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶209

Pramod Rana, son of Shobha Rana, resident of VillageKoldih, P.O.- Phuljhariya, P.S.- Ahilyapur & District - Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶210

Amarjeet Kumar Singh, son of Ram Prasad Singh, resident of Village- Banjari, P.O. & P.S. Bhandaria & District - Garhwa, Jharkhand.

¶211

Nawnit Kumar Upadhyay, son of Sidheshwar Upadhyay, resident of Village - Karwa Khurdam, P.O.- Ranka Bauliya, P.S. Garhwa & District Garhwa, Jharkhand.

¶212

Ujjawal Kumar, son of Umesh Prasad, resident of Kamlapuri Muhalla, P.S.- Garhwa & District -Garhwa, Jharkhand.

¶213

Basudev Mahto, son of Late Subash Chandra Mahto, resident of Panchayat- Krishnapur, P.S. & P.O.-Kharawan & District - Seraikela-Kharsawan, Jharkhand.

¶214

Rakesh Ranjan Pandey, son of Ram Kishor Pandey, resident of Ward No. 21, Chhater Bagicha, P.S. & P.O.Lohardaga & District - Lohardaga, Jharkhand.

¶215

¶216

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶217

Ashok Kumar, son of Girija Prasad Yadav, resident of Village- Pihra, P.S. & P.O.- Giridih & District -Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶218

Suman Toppo, daughter of Sushil Toppo, resident of P.O.Hussir, P.S. & P.O.- Kanke & District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 178. Prabhu Nath Prasad, son of Raj Nath Prasad, resident of Devi Mandap Road, Hesal, P.O., P.S. & District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶219

Deepak Kumar Sah, son of Manoj Sah, resident of Gulzarbagh, P.O., P.S. & District - Godda, Jharkhand.

¶220

Rohit Kumar, son of Durga Charan Mishra, resident of P.O.Pupunki Asharam, P.S.-Chas Mu & DistrictBokaro, Jharkhand.

¶221

Sailesh Kumar Mohli, son of Tulsi Mohli, resident of VillageAkdoni Khurid, P.O.- Beniadih, P.S.- Giridih, & District- Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶222

Prabhat Ranjan, son of Yaswant Prasad, resident of Village- Bandar, P.O. & P.S.- Bishrampur & District Palamu, Jharkhand.

¶223

Rajesh Kumar, son of Bijay Das, resident of House No. 98, Ward No. 6, P.O. & P.S.- Madhupur, Gram Panchayat – Bherwa & District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶224

Suman Kumari, daughter of Ashok Kumar, resident of Dushad Mohalla, P.O & P.S. – Ramgarh & District -Ramgarh, Jharkhand. 185. Prasanjeet Kumar, son of Ram Pratap Prasad, resident of Staff Quarter Netarhat Residential School, Amtipani, P.O., P.S. & District - Gumla, Jharkhand.

¶225

Bikash Kumar Pandey, son of Brajmohan Pandey, resident of Ward No. 03, Village- Singhitali, P.O. -Chapari, P.S.Bhawanathpur, District-Gharwa, Jharkhand. 187. Mukesh Kumar Ray, son of Umesh Ray, resident of Bankarnali, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar, Jharkhand. 188. Abhishek Kumar, son of Murari Prasad Choudhary, resident of Village- Bhurkunda, Lohoriya, P.O., P.S. & District - Deoghar, Jharkhand. 189. Rockey Kumar Rajak, son of Sunil Kumar Rajak, resident of Ward No. 19, Near Kali Mandir, June Bandh P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar, Jharkhand. 190. Manish Kumar Singh, son of Dipnarayan Singh, resident of P.O. & P.S.- Sarwan, Kapsio, Baijukaruwa, 27 years & District - Deoghar, Jharkhand. 191. Prabhat Gyan, son of Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, resident of Village- Jirulia, Chanddih P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶226

Pallav Kumar, son of Shyam Pyare Mishra, resident of Ward No. 34, Castairs Town, Santhal Pahariya Sewa Mandal, P.O., P.S. & District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶227

Sudhanshu Prasad, son of Ram Prasad Singh, resident of 13A, Ajabraydih, P.O. & P.S.- Kunda, Chanddih, District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶228

Vinay Kumar, son of Sarjun Panjiyara, resident of

¶229

¶230

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶231

Panchayat- Morney, Village & P.O.-T. Basdiha, P.S. - Mohanpur, District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶232

Pankaj Kumar Yadav, son of Jay Narayan Yadav, resident of Village- Jharkhandi Jamunia, P.O. & P.S.-Kunda & District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶233

Ranjeet Prakash Rajak, son of Bhubneshwar Prasad Rajak, resident of Katharatanr, P.O.- Hariharpur, P.S.- Taljhari & District - Dumka, Jharkhand.

¶234

Vinay Prakash, son of Ratan Kumar Jha, resident of House No. 89, Ward No. 24, B. N. Jha, Near St. Columbas School Bilasi, Nilkanthpur, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶235

Ram Kumar Deo, son of Lalit Prasad Deo, resident of Near Hanuman Mandir, Village- Kushmaha, Panchayat- Sarsa, ViaDeogha, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶236

Sankar Pandit, son of Gendo Pandit, resident of PanchayatAhilyapur, Block- Gandey, Gram & P.S.- Ahilyapur, P.O.Bengabad & District- Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶237

Ganesh Kumar Ray, son of Laljeet Ray, resident of VillageGhorchanchi, P.O.- Pirtand, P.S.- Pirtand & District- Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶238

Sachin Kumar, son of Murali Ram, resident of Near Middle School, Gadisirampur, P.O.- Gadi Srirampur, P.S.- Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶239

Santosh Kumar Ram, son of Bachu Lal Ram, resident of Gadisirampur, P.O. - Gadi Srirampur, P.S.– Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶240

Vivek Kumar Ranjan, son of Nand Kishore Roy, resident of Parwati Niwas, Krishna Nagar, Behind Carmel School, Alkapuri, P.O. & P.S.-Giridih, District Giridih.

¶241

Manoj Kumar Saw, son of Dharmu Saw, resident of Village- Jaspur, Panchayat - Jaspur, P.O.- Gadi Srirampur, P.S.Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶242

Uday Kumar Singh, son of Naresh Singh, resident of Village - Chunglo, P.O. - Gadi Srirampur, P.S.- Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶243

Bhuneshwar Prasad Verma, son of Badri Mahto, resident of Village- Bhalua, P.O.- Saranda, P.S. –Birni & District – Giridih.

¶244

Prakash Kumar, son of Rajendra Mahto, resident of VillageBhalua, Panchayat - Manjhidih, Block -Birni, P.O.- Saranda, P.S. Birni & District – Giridih.

¶245

Mukesh Kumar, son of Kaleshwar Prasad Verma, resident of Village- Bhalua, Panchayat- Manjhidih, Block Birni, P.O.Saranda, P.S.- Birni & District – Giridih.

¶246

Anil Yadav, son of Jayprakash Yadav, resident of VillageKenduwa 2, P.O. & P.S.- Chalkusa & District – Hazaribagh.

¶247

Navlesh Kumar Yadav, son of Jageshwar Yadav, resident of Village - Bero Kalan Alias Bero, P.O. -Berokala, P.S. – Barkattha & District – Hazaribagh.

¶248

Bhola Kumar Mahto, son of Narayan Mahto, resident of Village- Jamtara, Panchayat - Jamtara, P.O.- Jamtara, P.S.Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶249

Nitish Kumar, son of Niraj Kumar Das, resident of Village-

¶250

¶251

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶252

Mansadih (Hadhada), P.O. & P.S. - Chandouri, District – Giridih.

¶253

Ankit Kumar, son of Saryu Mahto, resident of Village & P.O. - Siyatand, P.S. - Jamua, District – Giridih

¶254

Kumar Vivek, son of Arun Prasad, resident of 37, Mandai Tola, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. -Khetko, P.S.- Bagodar & District – Giridih.

¶255

Rishikesh Kumar Mehta, son of Shiv Prasad Mehta, resident of Village & P.O. - Gunja, P.S.- Ichak & District – Hazaribagh.

¶256

Kailash Prasad Mehta, son of Shiv Prasad Mehta, resident of Village & P.O.- Gunja, P.S. –Ichak & District – Hazaribagh,

¶257

Loknath Prasad, son of Tribhuwan Prasad, resident of Village- Bara, P.O.- Atka, P.S. Bishnugarh & District– Hazaribagh.

¶258

Arvind Kumar, son of Rajendra Mahto, resident of VillageGarri Kalan, P.O.- Garikala, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District– Hazaribagh.

¶259

Purushotam Kumar, son of Baleshwar Rana, resident of Village - Garri Kalan, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, DistrictHazaribagh.

¶260

Sanjeet Singh, son of Manager Singh, resident of Village - Shandih, Near L.B. College, P.O.- Shandih, P.S.- Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶261

Ranjan Kumar, son of Tarun Kumar, resident of VillagePihra Manpur, P.O. & P.S.- Gawan, District – Giridih.

¶262

Niranjan Kumar, son of Doman Gope, resident of VillageMasratu, P.O.- Rewali, P.S.- Katkamdag & District – Hazaribagh.

¶263

Vikash Kumar, son of Ramdeo Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.- Sapamaran, P.S.- Giridih, & District – Giridih.

¶264

Gautam Poddar, son of Narayan Poddar, resident of Village - Sagarbhanga, P.O. - Baskupi, P.S. – Deoghar & District – Deoghar.

¶265

Kapil Bhogta, son of Narayan Ganjhu, resident of VillageCharhi Basti, P.O. & P.S.- Charhi, District – Hazaribagh.

¶266

Nikita Kumari, daughter of Rakesh Rajak, resident of Deepak Kumar Baitha, Chhauni Toli, Village- Jhiko Chatti, P.O. & P.S.- Bharno, District- Lohardaga.

¶267

Nidhika Kumari, daughter of Arjun Saw, resident of Village- Kathoutiya, P.O. - Dantokhurd, P.S.- Katkamsandi & District – Hazaribagh.

¶268

Rakhi Kumari, daughter of Kishori Mohan Prasad, resident of Village- Basobar, P.O. & P.S.- Daru, District – Hazaribagh

¶269

Pankaj Kumar, son of Tulsi Prasad Sahu, resident of 34, Bhutahi Murgaon, P.O. & P.S.- Bishnugarh, District – Hazaribagh.

¶270

Suraj Marandi, son of Rejenal Marandi, resident of VillageShri Ram Chowki, P.O. Mahadevganj, P.S.Sahebganj & District – Sahebganj.

¶271

Lakshmi Kumari, daughter of Ram Bhajan Ram, resident of Kunal Kumar, Michyari Lane Het Tola, Dewangna Chowk, P.O.

¶272

¶273

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶274

& P.S.- Korrah, District Hazaribagh.

¶275

Sanjay Saw, son of Hiraman Saw, resident of Ward No. 06, Village, Panchayat & P.O.- Naitand, P.S. - Jainagar, District – Koderma.

¶276

Ragini Kumari, daughter of Jiwan Chandra Azad, resident of Village- Kharika, P.O. - Dhangada, P.S. -Tandwa, District – Chatra.

¶277

Basant Yadav, son of Ram Sahay Yadav, resident of Village & P.O.- Darha, P.S. – Latehar & District Latehar.

¶278

Binay Kumar, son of Ram Bhajan Ram, resident of Village - Narshigh Sthan Banha, P.O.- Banha, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶279

Ashutosh Kumar Dubey, son of Prakash Dubey, resident of 39, Village & P.O. - Tilra, P.S. Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶280

Ashwani Kumar Pandey, son of Satyanarayan Pandey, resident of Village & P.O. - Biaria, P.S. – Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶281

Akash Kumar Dubey, son of Prakash Dubey, resident of Village & P.O.- Tilra, P.S. Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh

¶282

Vikash Kumar, son of Ranjeet Modi, resident of Village - Palounjla, Block - Birni, P.O. - Palaunjia, P.S.- Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶283

Arvind Kumar, son of Sukhi Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.- Lochar, P.S.-Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶284

Shobha Kumari, daughter of Kameshwar Saw, resident of Village- Serandag, P.O - Bagra More, P.S. – Chatra & District – Chatra.

¶285

Sunil Kumar Das, son of Baldeo Das, resident of VillageChoudharydih, Panchayat - Nawadih, Block- Suriya, P.O.Sabalpur, P.S.- Suriya & District- Giridih.

¶286

Meghnath Yadav, son of Ojir Yadav, resident of VillageBhatbigha, P.O.- Selhara Kala, P.S.- Gobindpur alias Gondpur & District – Hazaribagh.

¶287

Amit Kumar Rana, son of Kishori Rana, resident of Village - Baheri, Near Chano Petrol Pump, P.O.-Oria,P.S.– Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶288

Teklal Kumar, son of Devnath Mahto, resident of Village & P.O- Kutulua, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶289

Sanjay Sharma, son of Baldeo Thakur, resident of VillageKharkhari, P.O.- Jawahar Nagar, P.S.- Birni, & District – Giridih.

¶290

Chandan Kumar Paswan, son of Sukhdev Paswan, resident of Village - Chondhitand, Panchayat - Kendua, BlockDhanwar, P.O.- Orkhar, P.S.- Dhanwar, & District – Giridih.

¶291

Vikash Kumar Paswan, son of Deonandan Ram, resident of Village- Bonga, P.O. & P.S.- Bariyat, District – Hazaribagh

¶292

Anuj Kumar, son of Bajrangi Prajapati, resident of VillageBhushad, P.O. & P.S.- Lawalong, District – Chatra.

¶293

Indradeo Kumar, son of Shambhu Ram, resident of Village - Pindar Kon, P.O.- Gauria Karma, P.S. –Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶294

¶295

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶296

Chandan Kumar, son of Sakaldeo Choudhary, resident of Village - Baghanal, Panchayat - Kharkhari, Block- Birni, P.O.Jawaharnagar, P.S.- Birni & District- Giridih.

¶297

Amardeep Thakur, son of Umesh Thakur, resident of Pratappur, Jogiara, P.O.- Jogiara, P.S.- Chatra & District – Chatra.

¶298

Saket Bhartiy, son of Sailesh Bhartiy, resident of Village - Sisai, P.O. - Sirsai, P.S. Chatra & District – Chatra.

¶299

Mithlesh Kumar, son of Bindev Yadav, resident of VillageKukurman, Panchayat & P.O. - Yogiyara, P.S. – Pratappur & District – Chatra.

¶300

Sanjan Kumar Yadav, son of Arjun Prasad Yadav, resident of Village-Koni, P.O.- Malda, P.S.- Gawan & District – Giridih

¶301

Vibhuti Paswan, son of Chhathan Paswan, resident of Village - Nawadih, Panchayat - Sijua, P.O.- Jogiyara, P.S.Pratappur & District – Chatra.

¶302

Deepak Kumar, son of Lalan Paswan, resident of VillageMahugai, Jogidih, P.O.- Yadavnagar, P.S.- Chatra & District – Chatra.

¶303

Vishesh Singh, son of Baleshwar Singh, resident of VillagePadriya, Panchayat - Dondlo, Block- Bagodar, P.O.- Dondlo, P.S.- Bagodar, & District – Giridih.

¶304

Madhu Kumari, daughter of Basudeo Saw, resident of Ward No. 2, Pathalgada, Madangundi, P.O. & P.S.- Chandwara & District- Koderma.

¶305

Mukesh Kumar, son of Ramchandra Prasad, resident of Village- Naitand, P.O.- Naitanr, P.S.- Koderma & DistrictKoderma .

¶306

Sunil Kujur, son of Selvester Kujur, resident of 01 Birsa Tola, Matwari, P.O.- Hazaribagh, P.S.- Sadar & DistrictHazaribagh.

¶307

Saraswati Kumari, daughter of Ramlakhan Saw, resident of Village- Bara, P.O. & P.S.- Chatra & District- Chatra.

¶308

Sudhanshu Vishwakarma, son of Binod Kumar Vishwakarma, resident of Village & P.O.- Mandramo, P.S.Suriyan & District- Giridih

¶309

Pankaj Kumar, son of Sahdeo Prasad Yadav, resident of Village- Badano, P.O.- Maskedih, P.S.- Chalkusha, & DistrictHazaribagh.

¶310

Piyush Tigga, son of Poresh Tigga, resident of VillageLakhe, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh & District- Hazazibagh

¶311

Sunil Kumar, son of Suresh Saw, resident of VillagePindra, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O.- Tapin, P.S.- Ramgarh & District – Ramgarh.

¶312

Binod Kumar Rana, son of Bhikhari Rana, resident of Ward No. 01, Village- Nawdiha, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, District – Hazaribagh.

¶313

Sunil Kumar, son of Ramswarup Gope, resident of VillageSindur, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh

¶314

Prakash Sahu, son of Ranthu Sahu, resident of VillageKulhai, P.O.- Khatanga, P.S.– Rania & District Khunti.

¶315

Golden Kumar, son of Naresh Ram, resident of Lepo Road,

¶316

¶317

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶318

Ravi Nagar, P.O. - Hazaribagh, P.S. –Sadar & District – Hazaribagh.

¶319

Sindhu Mala, daughter of Devnarayan Mehta, resident of Village- Bonga, P.O.- Bariyath, P.S.-Ichak & District – Hazaribagh.

¶320

Ravindra Kumar Paswan, son of Ramvilas Paswan, resident of Village- Dhab, P.O.- Manjhiladih, P.S.- Birni & DistrictGiridih.

¶321

Anupraj Shekhar, son of Dinesh Prasad, resident of Village- Jharpo, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O.- Jharpo, P.S.- Ichak & District – Hazaribagh.

¶322

Vivek Kumar Singh, son of Binod Singh, resident of VillageChano, P.O.- Oria, P.S. – Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh

¶323

Shivam Kumar Singh, son of Ranjeet Singh, resident of Village- Balia, P.O.- Kutipisi, P.S.- Katkamnsandi & District – Hazaribagh.

¶324

Gultan Kumar Sahu, son of Dineshwar Prasad Sahu, resident of Village- Ukharsal, P.O.- Kurhobindo, P.S.- Jamua & District – Giridih.

¶325

Binay Kumar, son of Biltu Prasad Mehta, resident of Village - Barka Kalan, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, DistrictHazaribagh.

¶326

Ravikant Kumar, son of Parmeshwar Pandit, resident of Village - Domhan, P.O. - Kishutand, P.S. –Giridih & District – Giridih.

¶327

Appu Kumar, son of Kamaldeo Singh, resident of VillageNawada, P.O. & P.S.- Chatra, District-Chatra.

¶328

Akash Kumar Singh, son of Abhay Singh, resident of House No. WZ 13J, Gali No.- 2, Pankha Road, Vasistha Park, Sagar Pur, Nangal Raya, P.O. & P.S.- South West, District – Delhi

¶329

Purushottam Kumar Singh, son of Rambriksh Singh, resident of Village -Tilra, P.O. & P.S.- Mayurhand, District – Chatra.

¶330

Laloo Prasad Yadav, son of Lal.i Prasad Yadav, resident of Village- Mahatha Khaira, Panchayat- Shivpur, P.O. & P.S.Satgawan, District- Koderma.

¶331

Baldeo Yadav, son of Rameshwar Yadav, resident of Village- Bandutta Fulwaria, P.O.-Bagro, P.S.- Koderma & District – Koderma.

¶332

Sangeeta Kumari, daughter of Faudi Yadav, resident of Village- Slaiya, Ward No. 07, Ρ.Ο.- Pathaldiha, P.S. – Koderma & District – Koderma.

¶333

Vijay Kumar, son of Ramsahay Yadav, resident of Ward No. 6, P.O.- Pathaldiha, P.S. – Koderma & District-Koderma

¶334

Kapildeo Yadav, son of Birendra Yadav, resident of Ward No. - 03, Village - Chiglabar, P.O. -Bekobar, P.S.- Koderma & District – Koderma.

¶335

Narayan Rajwar, son of Kartik Rajwar, resident of Village - Jainamore Side, P.O. - Jainamore, P.S.– Jaridih & District – Bokaro.

¶336

Akshay Kumar Gupta, son of Sambhu Prasad Gupta, resident of Village-Chatti, Bariyatu, P.O.- Chatti, P.S.- Bariyatu

¶337

¶338

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶339

& District – Hazaribagh.

¶340

Laxman Kumar, son of Rajeshwar Kumar, resident of Baba Path, Anand Vihar, Gali No. - 6, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District – Hazaribagh.

¶341

Adarsh Kumar Ravi, son of Ram Ballav Ram, resident of Village & P.O.- Dari, P.S. Kanki & District – Hazaribagh.

¶342

Pawan Kumar Yadav, son of Ramlal Prasad Yadav, resident of Village- Akdoni Kala, P.O.- Akdoni Kalan, P.S.- Giridih (Mufassil) & District – Giridih.

¶343

Satyam Kumar, son of Pradeep Kumar Singh, resident of Village- Ranik, P.O.- Bela, P.S.- Chouparan & District – Hazaribagh.

¶344

Ashish Kumar, son of Umesh Prasad Soni, resident of Ward No. 4, Village- Mandai Khurd, P.O.- Reformetry School, P.S. – Hazaribagh & District-Hazaribagh.

¶345

Uday Kumar, son of Nageshwar Prasad Mehta, resident of Village- Ghaghra Khurd, P.O.- Punai, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶346

Anil Kumar Yadav, son of Banshi Mahto, resident of Village- Barano Maskedih, P.O. & P.S.- Barkatha, District – Hazaribagh.

¶347

Sudhir Kumar Yadav, son of Prabhu Yadav, resident of Ward No. 3, Village- Chiglabar, P.O.- Bekobar, P.S. Koderma & District – Koderma.

¶348

Swet Nisha, daughter of Dilip Kumar Sharma, resident of Village- Lengrappar, P.O. & P.S.- Domchanch, District – Koderma.

¶349

Ashutosh Kumar, son of Nirpat Prasad, resident of Village & Panchayat - Khetako, Block -Bagodar, P.O. - Khetako, P.S. Bagodar & District – Giridih.

¶350

Ankit Kumar, son of Ajay Kumar, resident of VillageDarudih, P.O. & P.S.- Daru, District – Hazaribagh.

¶351

Ravi Roshan Kumar, son of Ajeet Kumar, resident of Village- Berho, P.O. & P.S.- Tatijhariya, District – Hazaribagh

¶352

Sushil Kumar, son of Umesh Prasad, resident of VillageDarudih, P.Ο.- Daroo, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶353

Pawan Kumar, son of Amrit Prasad, resident of PanchayatKhetko, Block- Bagodar, Village & P.O.- Khetko, P.S.- Bagodar & District – Giridih

¶354

Shakti Kumar Mandal, son of Shiv Shanker Prasad Mandal, resident of Panchayat- Sasarkho, Block- Dumri, VillageKushto Nawadih, P.O.- Naitand, P.S.- Dumri & District- Giridih.

¶355

Komal Kumari, daughter of Aditya Prasad, resident of Village & P.O.-Pancha, P.S.- Ormanjhi & District- Ranchi

¶356

Abhishek Kumar, son of Ramsunder Prasad Mandal, resident of 345 G, Korra Road, Dhobia Talab More, P.O.College More, P.S.- Sadar & District- Hazaribagh.

¶357

Bhagirath Mandal, son of Hari Mandal, resident of Panchayat- Mandramo East, Block- Suriya, Village- Khairabad, P.O.- Mandramo, P.S.- Suriya & District- Giridih.

¶358

Jitendra Kumar Rana, son of Awadh Rana, resident of

¶359

¶360

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶361

Village- Dodhi, P.O.- Madhniya, P.S.- Dorhi & District – Chatra. 308. Gorelal Yadav, son of Kokil Yadav, resident of Village - Karakhut, P.O.- Bagro, P.S.- Koderma & District – Koderma.

¶362

Sunny Kumar, son of Din Dayal Shahu, resident of 266, K.B. Marg, Kani Bazar, P.O.- Hazaribag, P.S. –Sadar & District – Hazaribagh.

¶363

Amit Kumar Chandravanshi, son of Prabhu Ram, resident of 334, Kani Bazar, Munka Bagicha Road, P.O.- Hazaribag, P.S.- Sadar & District – Hazaribagh.

¶364

Sonu Kumar, son of Dilip Yadav, resident of Thana- Brahi, Village & P.O. Purhara, P.S.- Rasoiyadhamna & District – Hazaribagh

¶365

Subodh Kumar, son of Birendra Pandit, resident of Village & P.O- Tetariadih, P.S.- Koderma & District- Koderma.

¶366

Mayank Kumar Gupta, son of Sunil Ram, resident of Panchayat, Block, Village, P.O. & P.S.- Gandey , District Giridih.

¶367

Sangita Kumari, daughter of Rameshwar Oraon, resident of 12, Rahamatnagar, Kharika, P.O.- Dhangada, P.S.- Tandwa & District – Chatra.

¶368

Ash Kerketta, son of Dhaneshwar Kerketta, resident of Village- Bahoranpur, Churchu Road, P.O.- Chandwar, P.S.Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶369

Amit Kumar, son of Bal Govind Ram, resident of 25, Chalkusha, P.O.- Chalkusha, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District – Hazaribagh.

¶370

Pappu Kumar Gupta, son of Sudama Prasad Gupta, resident of Ward No.- 7, Village- Amhar Khas, P.O.- Kocheya, P.S.- Nagar Untari & District – Garhwa.

¶371

Deepak Kumar Verma, son of Sarju Prasad Verma, resident of Village - Balidih, P.O.- Baddiha, P.S.- Hirodih & District – Giridih.

¶372

Aryan Kumar, son of Mahendra Ray, resident of VillageMahtotand, P.O.- Mirzaganj, P.S.- Jamua & District – Giridih

¶373

Sonu Prasad Kushwaha, son of Mahesh Kushwaha, resident of Village- Ratanpur, P.O.- Arkhango, P.S.- Dhanwar & District – Giridih.

¶374

Satrughan Kumar Soni, son of Sudama Devi, resident of 44, P.O. & P.S.- Jhumri Telaiya, Bypass Road, District – Koderma.

¶375

Ravi Shankar Singh, son of Bandhu Singh, resident of Village & P.O.- Demu, P.S.- Latehar & District Latehar.

¶376

Afaque Ahmad, son of Md. Ibrahim, resident of House No. 786, Chhota Talab, Near Nagma Store, Mojahid Nagar, Hind Piri, P.O., G.P.O- Ranchi, P.S.-Sukhdeonagar & DistrictRanchi.

¶377

Uday Pratap Mahto, son of Sohari Mahto, resident of Opp. Shiv Mandir, Village - Mesra, P.O.- Neori Vikash, P.S.- Sadar & District – Ranchi.

¶378

Md. Mokarram Jaya, son of Md. Naim Uddin, resident of Village & P.O.- Tetrain, P.S.- Panki, District – Palamu.

¶379

Vikas Kumar Mahto, son of Subhas Mahto, resident of

¶380

¶381

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶382

Village- Baradih, P.O.- Bandhdih, P.S.– Jaridih & District – Bokaro.

¶383

Deepak Kumar, son of Hemlal Pandit, resident of Near Birbal Kirana Store, Sarna Toli, P.S.-Kokar, P.O., G.P.O.- Ranchi & District – Ranchi.

¶384

Vimal Kumar, son of Balgobind Ram, resident of VillageDahugutu (Gajtand), P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District – Khunti.

¶385

Vikram Kumar Pandit, son of Rameshwar Pandit, resident of Village- Kaindinagar, P.O.- Kolhaiya, P.S.- Rajpur & District – Chatra.

¶386

John Ranjit Runda, son of Prakash Runda, resident of Near Church Tati, P.O. & P.S.- Kuru, District – Lohardaga.

¶387

Sandeep Kumar Gupta, son of Rajendra Prasad Gupta, resident of Village & P.O.- Tarhasi, P.S.- Palamu & DistrictPalamu.

¶388

Rajeev Ranjan, son of Bhim Saw, resident of J.A.P. 4, Sector 12, Bokaro Steel City, Marafari Colony, P.O. & P.S.Bokaro, District – Bokaro.

¶389

Ujjwal Kumar Yadav, son of Balkisun Yadav, resident of Village - Rege, P.O. - Karge, P.S. – Ranchi & District- Ranchi

¶390

Dev Kumar Pandey, son of Naresh Pandey, resident of Village & P.O.- Shankh, P.S.- Ganwan, District – Giridih.

¶391

Uttam Kumar Raj, son of Sudhir Prasad Verma, resident of Village- Barmariya, P.O.- Chitra, P.S.– Deoghar & DistrictDeoghar.

¶392

Satish Kumar Bhagat, son of Suren Kumar Bhagat, resident of Village- Dhouta Toli Puggu, P.O.- Armai, P.S.Gumla & District – Gumla.

¶393

Kali Prasad Murmu, son of Ram Kumar Manjhi, resident of House No. 350, P.O.- Champi, P.S. -Petarwar, Ambatola & District– Bokaro.

¶394

Kundan Kumar, son of Sunil Kumar, resident of VillageChamardiha, P.O. & P.S.- Barwadih, District- Latehar.

¶395

Mithilesh Kumar Singh, son of Parmeshwar Singh, resident of Village & P.O.- Baredih, P.S.- Tamar, District – Ranchi.

¶396

Deepu Kumar, son of Ram Lakhan Mahto, resident of Siyar Toli, Itki West, Near Church, Itki Thakur Goan, P.O. & P.S.Itki, District – Ranchi.

¶397

August Bharti, son of Bipin Kumar Singh, resident of Q. No.- DT- 2314, Tanki Side, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District – Ranchi.

¶398

Ravi Shekhar, son of Uday Shankar Singh, resident of DT1696, Tank Side, HEC Colony, Sector 4, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District – Ranchi.

¶399

Nitu Kumari, daughter of Khemlal Bedia, resident of Hesla Tola, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O.- Hesia, P.S.- Argada & DistrictRamgarh.

¶400

Sunil Kumar, son of Basudeo Prasad Das, resident of Village- Fatehpur, P.O.- Maniyadih, P.S.- Tundi, DistrictDhanbad.

¶401

Binod Kumar, son of Maheshwar Prasad, resident of Village & P.O.- Khutta, P.S.- Satgawan, District – Koderma.

¶402

¶403

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶404

Nishit Kachhap, son of Krishna Oraon, resident of House No.- 136, Tiril, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District – Ranchi.

¶405

Birendra Kumar, son of Gauri Shankar Das, resident of Ward No.- 7, Village- Alagdiha, P.O.- Khariodih, P.S.- Jainagar & District – Koderma.

¶406

Ujjawal Kumar Verma, son of Aditya Prasad Verma, resident of Ganpati Enclave, Flat No.- 1B, Road No.- 4B, Kusum Vihar, Morabadi, P.O. & P.S. - Morabadi, District – Ranchi.

¶407

Jugesh Kumar Bediya, son of Sahdev Bediya, resident of Village- Mishrain Morha, P.O.- Religarha, P.S.- Churchu & District- Hazaribagh.

¶408

Krishnanand Pandey, son of Jayshanker Pandey, resident of Panchayat- Bairiya, Village & P.O.- Bairiya, P.S.- Deori & District – Giridih.

¶409

Adil Hussain, son of Md. Gulzar Hussain, resident of Village & P.O.- Arita, P.S. Chandankiyari, District – Bokaro.

¶410

Vijay Kujur, son of Prakash Kujur, resident of Juria Karamtoli, P.O.- Juria, P.S-. Lohardaga & District – Lohardaga

¶411

Birendra Kumar Thakur, son of Baldev Thakur, resident of Village- Napokhurd, P.O.- Gossaibalia, P.S-. Barkagaon & District – Hazaribagh.

¶412

Sonu Kumar Soni, son of Gopal Sav, resident of 32 Bank More, Lari Bank Road, Lari Kalan, P.Ο.- Lari, P.S.- Ramgarh & District – Ramgarh.

¶413

Mantu Kumar, son of Gopal Singh, resident of Village & P.O.- Kataiya, P.S.- Satgawan, District- Koderma.

¶414

Subham Kumar, son of Karam Bhagat, resident of VillageTandwa, P.O. & P.S.- Tandwa, District – Chatra.

¶415

Nitin Kumar, son of Gyan Chand Sahu, resident of Chhitkal Tola, P.O.- Sukurhuttu, P.S.- Kanke & District-Ranchi.

¶416

Pankaj Kumar, son of Shyam Nath Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.- Sukurhuttu, P.S.- Kanke & District – Ranchi.

¶417

Roshan Kumar Gupta, son of Ganga Prashad Gupta, resident of Pipra Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District – Khunti

¶418

Sandeep Kumar, son of Bijay Kumar, resident of Near Dam Side, DT- 632, Sector- 9, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District – Ranchi.

¶419

Deelip Kumar, son of Mohan Ram, resident of Namak Factory Gali, Alkapuri, Ratu Road, P.O.- Ranchi GPO, P.S.Ranchi & District – Ranchi.

¶420

Saurav Kumar Sinha, son of Shailesh Kumar Sinha, resident of C/O - Mahendra Prasad Singh, House No. 354, Premnagar, Road No.- 6, Shanti Colony, Singh More, Hatiya, P.O. & P.S.- Hatiya, District- Ranchi.

¶421

Nikhil Kumar, son of Ajit Kumar Singh, resident of Village & P.O.- Bijaulli, P.S.- Aurangabad & District – Aurangabad

¶422

Sanjay Roshan Minj, son of Shobhnath Minj, resident of Parswan Raje, P.O. & P.S.- Garhwa, District- Garhwa.

¶423

Rajesh Tudu, son of Ganesh Tudu, resident of VillageBagjhopa, P.O.- Tularam Bhuska, P.S.- Boarijore & District – Godda.

¶424

¶425

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶426

Tiwari Oraon, son of Bahadur Oraon, resident of VillageBara, P.O.- Marangloiya, P.S.- Balumath & District – Latehar

¶427

Deepanshu Pandey, son of Vishwanath Pandey, resident of Bagodih More, P.O. & P.S.- Sariya, District – Giridih.

¶428

Sarwan Kumar, son of Raj Kumar Saw, resident of Mahadeo Talab Road, Whitty Bazar, P.O. & P.S.- Giridih, District – Giridih.

¶429

Ujjwal Kumar Sinha, son of Subodh Kumar Sinha, resident of Krishna Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Giridih, District- Giridih.

¶430

Purshotam Kumar, son of Ashok Singh, resident of VillageUrro, P.O.- Sabalpur, P.S.- Suirya & District- Giridih.

¶431

Kundan Kumar, son of Krishna Nand Sharma, resident of New Barganda, West of Ashram, P.O. & P.S.- Giridih, DistrictGiridih.

¶432

Brahmadeo Kumar, son of Nunulal Yadav, resident of Village- Ambatand, P.O.- Kurhobindo, P.S.- Jamua & District – Giridih.

¶433

Anil Kishku, son of Budhan Kisku, resident of VillageTetariya, P.O.- Baddiha, P.S.- Giridih (Mufassil) & District – Giridih.

¶434

Ashish Kumar Mandal, son of Jay Prakash Mandal, resident of Village- Nawadih, P.O.- Chunglo, P.S.- Jamua & District – Giridih.

¶435

Faiyaz Ansari, son of Md. Amir Husain, resident of VillageKharpoka, P.O.-Khukhra, P.S.-Pirtand & District- Giridih.

¶436

Pooja Rana, daughter of Jiwadhan Rana, resident of Village - Jarmune Purvi Gram Manjhiladih, P.O. & P.S.Bagodar, District – Giridih.

¶437

Chandrashekhar Ram, son of Mungeshwar Ram, resident of Village & P.O. - Ganeshpur, P.S.- Balumath & District – Latehar.

¶438

Dilip Kumar, son of Sita Ram, resident of Village- Basdiha, P.O.- Dandar, P.S.- Dandar Kala & District – Palamu.

¶439

Pawan Kumar Ram, son of Rameshwar Ram, resident of Panchayat, P.O. & P.S.- Taratand, District – Giridih.

¶440

Tara Kumar Ram, son of Jagdish Ram, resident of P.O.Umedanda, P.S.- Burmu & District – Ranchi.

¶441

Annu Kumari, daughter of Khageshwar Mahto, resident of Mahto Tola, Teliyatu, Barkakana, P.O.- Barkakana, P.S.– Ramgarh & District – Ramgarh.

¶442

Bablu Kumar Gupta, son of Satyanarayan Gupta, resident of Near Surya Mandir, Sarovar Nagar Dam Side, P.O.- Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdev Nagar & District – Ranchi.

¶443

Praveen Kumar, son of Chandradeep Singh, resident of Keshav Kunj, Sunder Nagar, Near ITI Bus Stand, P.O.- Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdev Nagar & District – Ranchi.

¶444

Aayush Vaibhav, son of Rajendra Kumar Sinha, resident of House No. 122, Before Devalaya Mandir, Lower Burdwan Compound, Lalpur, P.O.- Ranchi GPO, P.S.- Lalpur & District – Ranchi.

¶445

Savita Kumari, daughter of Pradeep Prasad Mehta, resident of Piskanagri, Tikra Toli, P.O.- Piska, P.S.- Ranchi &

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

District – Ranchi

Rajeev Kumar Sinha, son of Gulab Prasad Sinha, resident of Ratu Road, Near Jharkhand. Public School, Lakshmi Nagar, P.O.- Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdev Nagar & District – Ranchi.

¶450

Priyanka Rani, daughter of Late Shiv Kumar Pandey, resident of Maya Devi, Near Power House, C.T.O. Road, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District – Ranchi.

¶451

Vikash Gupta, son of Suraj Prasad Gupta, resident of House No.- 125, HEC Colony, Sector - 2, P.O. & P.S. - Dhurwa, District – Ranchi.

¶452

Ashutosh Kumar, son of Uma Shankar Manjhi, resident of Village- Pokhraha Khurd, Rajwadih, P.O.- Rajwadih, P.S.Satbarwa & District – Palamu.

¶453

Prakash Kumar Yadav, son of Rajendra Yadav, resident of Village- Titlangi, P.O.- Loharasi, P.S.- Pipratand & District – Palamu.

¶454

Kaushal Kishor, son of Parshu Ram Mahto, resident of Village- Darudih, P.O. Sangbar, P.S. –Lesliganj & District – Palamu.

¶455

Namita Kumari, daughter of Nagendra Pathak, resident of Flat No.- 201, Madhusudan Apartment, Dimna Road, Mango, Near MGM Medical College, P.O. & P.S. - Mango, District - Pashchimi Singhbhum. 393. Sunita Mahto, daughter of Santosh Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.- Kothadih, P.S.- Ranchi & District – Ranchi 394. Suraj Kumar Linda, son of Birsa Oraon, resident of House No.- 127, Village- Boreya, Tinkoniya Bazar, P.O.- Boreya, P.S.Kanke & District- Ranchi.

¶456

Manoranjan Kumar, son of Pramod Singh, resident of Village & P.O.- Sonpura, P.S.- Tarhasi & District – Palamu

¶457

Awadhesh Kumar, son of Krishna Mistri, resident of VillageBhauraj, Panchayat- Humajang, P.O. & P.S.- Pratappur, District – Chatra.

¶458

Shiv Charan Hansda, son of Mathura Hansda, resident of VillageGohalmara, Chandrapur, Baharagora, P.O.Baharagora, P.S.- Chandrapur & District -East Singhbhum.

¶459

Madhu Prasad, daughter of Suraj Saw, resident of VillageKudrum, P.O.- Bisrampur, P.S.- Ranka & District- Garhwa.

¶460

Parwez Hayat, son of Nasim Uddin, resident of House No.5, Village- Rewat Kala, P.O.- Matnog, P.S.- Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶461

Ritu Rajak, son of Chandar Rajak, resident of VillageLohandi Khurd, P.O.- Lohandi, P.S.- Chauparan & District – Hazaribagh.

¶462

Allam Ansari, son of Ajmudin Ansari, resident of Tetrain Bazar, Village, P.O. & P.S. Tetrain, District-Palamu.

¶463

Akash Tigga, son of Sambhu Tigga, resident of Late Sambhu Tigga, Village- Makhmandro, P.O & P.S- Ratu, Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶464

Kamal Kishor, son of Arvind kumar Roy resident of Village - Sugga Pahari, P.O. & P.S.- Madhupur, Deoghar Jharkhand.

¶465

Komal Kumari, daughter of Prahlad Mahto, resident of

¶466

¶467

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶468

Karra Road Nawa Toli, P.O. & P.S. & District Khunti Jharkhand.

¶469

Sumit Kumar, son of Prahlad Chandra Mahto, resident of Khunti, Nawatoli, Kara Road, Khunti, P.O, P.S. & Dist.- Khunti.

¶470

Deepshikha Kumari, daughter of Satish Kumar, resident of Village- Bhauraj, Panchayat- Humajang, P.O.- Pratappur, Bhaunraj, P.O., P.S. & District-Chatra.

¶471

Nujhat Tabassum, daughter of Yusuf Ansari, resident of VillagePAKDIH P.O.-BENA, P.S.JAMTARA, Jamtara, Jharkhand.

¶472

Arbind Kumar, son of Bijendra Ram, resident of VillageBandla, P.O.- Kutmu, P.S.- Pandu, Palamu Jharkhand.

¶473

Raju Mahto, son of Nanku Mahto , resident of Doriya Toli, Balalong, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi.

¶474

Anand Kumar Yadav, son of Karmani Yadav, resident of Panchayat - Chungalkhar, Block- Jamua Village- Chungalkhar, P.O.- Bhandaro, P.S.- Hirodih, Giridih Jharkhand.

¶475

Harish Ranjan, son of Barhan Ram Dangi, resident of Purna dih, chhotki Pona, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi.

¶476

Rahul Kumar, son of Vijay Kumar resident of Tumbagara Near Navjivan hospital, Village- Tumbagara, P.O.- Rankikala, P.O.- Satbarwa, District-Palamu Jharkhand.

¶477

Prateek Toppo, son of Late Dinesh Toppo , resident of Near Akhara Karam Toli, Morabadi, Ranchi, Jharkhand, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi.

¶478

Sabita Khalkho, daughter of Baijnath Khalkho, resident of Near Railway Line, Daud Nagar, Dibadih, Ranchi, Jharkhand, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi.

¶479

Ratan Kumar Singh, son of Anil Prasad Singh, resident of 773, bhagalpur road mission hospital side by mission hospital, satya nagar, Godda, P.O., P.S. & District-Godda.

¶480

Harish Pandit, son of Sukhdeo Pandit, resident of jarmuney pacshmi bagodar, Gram- Sonturpi, Post- Jarmuney, Thana- Bagodar, Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶481

Bhupendra Pandit, son of Basudeo Pandit, resident of Jarmuney Pacshmi Bagodar, Gram- Sonturpi, P.O.- Jarmuney, P.S.- Bagodar & District- Giridih.

¶482

Sunil Oraon, son of Bigal Oraon, resident of Jilingserang, Guridih, Ranchi, jon R.s, Ranchi, Jharkhand, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi.

¶483

Golden Prasad, son of Jay Ram Prasad, resident of VillageKasiya, P.O.- Jhabar, P.S.- Daltonganj, District-Palamu, Jharkhand.

¶484

Pritam Kujur, son of Luthru Oraon, resident of Amliya Pipar Toli, Amliya Kalyanpur, Amalia, verno, Gumla, Jharkhand, P.O., P.S. & District-Gumla.

¶485

Vinita Kumari, daughter of Ramchandra Jasiwal, resident of Sanjay Kumar Bhagat, Village & P.o- Taimara, P.S.Dashamfall, & District-Ranchi.

¶486

Shubham Kumar, son of Vidya Sagar Mehta, resident of town no-2, Village- Kumhar toli, redma, P.S.- Medninagar, redma dakshini, P.O. & P.S.- Daltonganj, District-Palamu

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

Jharkhand.

Rakesh Kumar, son of Mohan Mochi, resident of Graam - Soparam, P.O.- Saradhu, P.S.- Tandwa , District-Chatra, Jharkhand.

¶491

Rakesh Kumar Mahto, son of Shuddheshwer Mahto, resident of P.S.- Sonahatu, P.O.-Oraondih, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶492

Sweta Pradhan, son of Krishna Mistri, resident of VillageBhauraj Panchayat-Humajang, P.O., P.S. & District-Chatra.

¶493

Braj Kishor Mahto, son of Laldeo Mahto, resident of 275, Bhelwa Tand, Churi, Karkadih, Ranchi, P.O., P.S. & DistrictRanchi.

¶494

Lal Vijay Anand Shahdeo, son of Lal Birbal Nath Shahdeo, resident of Village- Lohagara, P.O.- Lodhma Thana- Karra, Khunti, Jharkhand, P.O., P.S. & District-Khunti.

¶495

Haresh Chandra Patar, son of Rajballave Patar, resident of Arbind .i Das, Sanjay Nagar Colony, Block ke Pass, P.O. & P.S.- Ratu, & District-Ranchi.

¶496

Sanjeev Kumar Mahto, son of Sachit Kumar Mahto, resident of Gaon- Belposh, P.O.- Tunia, Block- Sonua, Panchayat- Baljori, Goilkera, P.O., P.S. & District-West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.

¶497

Navin Kumar, son of Brijkishor Thakur, resident of VillageDhatiwana, Gopalganj, P.O., P.S. & District-Gopalganj.

¶498

Ashutosh Kumar Tiwary, son of Baban Tiwary, resident of C/O- Ambika Prasad, LTR, Amprit Gope, Nandgaon, Shastri Nagar, P.O.- L.B.S. Nagar, P.S.- Patna & District- Patna

¶499

Rahul Kumar Mahato, son of Navin Kumar, resident of Village- Madhuban New Colony, P.O.- Madhuban, P.S.Dhanbad & District – Dhanbad

¶500

Khushboo Kumari, daughter of Prabhu Oraon, resident of P.S.- Latehar, Village- Murup, P.Ο.- Latehar & District – Latehar

¶501

Raushan Kumar Gupta, son of Naresh Prasad Gupta, resident of Village- Banpur, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar, District – Latehar

¶502

Aprajita Kumari, daughter of Dilmohan Ram, resident of C/O Ghanshyam Turi, Village- Chiro, P.O.- Chandwa, P.S.Chandwa & District – Latehar.

¶503

Sumit Kumar Yadav, son of Lal.i Yadav, resident of Village & P.O.- Richughuta, P.S.- Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶504

Sakshi Kumari, daughter of Rakesh Kumar, resident of Thana Chowk, Gurudwara Road, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar Hsgii & District – Latehar.

¶505

Lal Mohan Singh, son of Ramkhelawan Singh, resident of Village - Chhipadohar, P.O. & P.S. - Latehar, District – Latehar.

¶506

Amit Kumar Gupta, son of Suresh Prasad Gupta, resident of Near Girls School, Saroj Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Chandwa & District – Latehar.

¶507

Ranjan Bhuiyan, son of Rajdev Bhuiyan, resident of Village- Mile, P.O.- Matlong, P.S. – Manika & District- Latehar

¶508

Shinku Kumar, son of Vijay Prasad, resident of C/O - Vijay

¶509

¶510

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶511

Prasad, Village- Purni Palheya, P.Ο.- Palheya, P.S. Manik, VTCPalheya & District – Latehar.

¶512

Nazis Ansari, son of Jamaluddin Ansari, resident of S/O Jamaluddin Ansari, Village- Fudi, P.O. & P.S.– Khunti & District – Khunti.

¶513

Manoj Kumar Singh, son of Chamru Singh, resident of S/O - Chamru Singh, Village & P.O.- Demu, P.S.- Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶514

Namdhari Ram, son of Latoo Ram, resident of S/O- Lattu Ram, Village- Ganeshpur, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶515

Vishwanath Kumar Singh, son of Yamuna Singh, resident of C/O - Yamuna Singh, Village - Newari, P.O.- Murup, P.S.Latehar & District – Latehar

¶516

Dinesh Yadav, son of Bishundev Yadav, resident of S/OBishundev Yadav, Village & P.O.- Dundu, P.S.- Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶517

Sachindra Oraon, son of Devshahay Oraon, resident of S/O - Devshahay Oraon, Village- Arahara, P.O.- Herhanj, P.S.- Balu & District – Latehar.

¶518

Sumitra Kumari, daughter of Anil Oraon, resident of D/OAnil Oraon, Village- Arahara, P.O.- Tasu Herhanj, P.S.- Balu & District – Latehar.

¶519

Ghanshyam Turi, son of Shaniwar Turi, resident of S/OShaniwar Turi, Village- Chiro, P.O. & P.S.- Chandwa, District – Latehar.

¶520

Prashant Kumar Singh, son of Hari Deo Singh, resident of S/O- Hari Deo Singh, Village- Mangra, P.O.- Murup, P.S.Latehar & District- Latehar.

¶521

Jay Shankar Oraon, son of Dukhan Oraon, resident of S/ODukhan Oraon, Bandua, Palheya, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar & District- Latehar.

¶522

Sohan Singh, son of Gaju Singh, resident of S/O- Sri Gaju Singh, 23, Karmahi, Near Ranchi Road, Dundu, P.O. & P.S.Latehar, District- Latehar.

¶523

Seema Kumari, daughter of Mani Saw, resident of W/OShankar Prasad, Village- Mail, P.O.- Matlong, P.S.- Manika & District- Latehar.

¶524

Deepak Bando, son of Kisun Bando, resident of S/O- Kisun Bando, Village- Sundil, P.O.- Kamre, P.S.- Ratu & DistrictRanchi.

¶525

Tribhuwan Murmu, son of Kashinath Murmu, resident of 6E, KOH, Near Samudayak Bhawan, P.O.- Munga Sarla, P.S.Petabar & District- Bokaro.

¶526

Niranjan Kachhap, son of Vimal Kachhap, resident of 80 A, Village- Khijri, P.O. & P.S.- Namkum, District- Ranchi

¶527

Sunil Munda, son of Lutharu Munda, resident of Setathuru, P.O.- Birda, P.S.- Karra & District- Khunti.

¶528

Roshan Tigga, son of Sushil Tigga, resident of Dibadih Bhagat Kocha, Doranda, H.O., P.O., P.S. & District- Ranchi.

¶529

Raghavendo, son of JP Tiwari, resident of Jwala Prasad

¶530

¶531

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶532

Tiwari, 15/1, New Saket Nagar, Hinoo, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, District- Ranchi. 460. Pramila Bediya, daughter of Bhimeshwar Bediya, resident of Phulmani Devi, Harchanda, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi & DistrictRanchi 461. Manoj Kumar Bedia, son of Chandra Mohan Bedia, resident of Near Temple, Village- Sursu Harjalum, P.O.- Tati, P.S.Angra & District- Ranchi. 462. Manoj Kujur, son of Bertus Kujur, resident of Koynar Toli, P.S.- Jagannathpur, P.O.- Pundag & District- Ranchi 463. Laxmi Kant Mahto, son of Pawan Mahto, resident of House No. – 19, Kishunpur, Parasi, P.O.- Tamar, P.S.- Ranchi & District- Ranchi. 464. Hembrom Clement, son of Cyril Hembrom, resident of Ilaki, P.O., P.S. & District- Sahibganj. 465. Bipul Kumar, son of Murari Prasad Singh, resident of Village- Kargali Kala, Kubri, P.O., P.S. & District- Giridih. 466. Kapildeo Mahto, son of Shri Dukhan Mahato, resident of Baradaha, Baliapur, P.O., P.S. & District- Dhanbad.

¶533

Shashi Gope, son of Mohan Gope, resident of Pandra, Bero, P.O. & P.S.- Pandra & District- Ranchi.

¶534

Kumar Ajay Prasad, son of Rajendra Prasad, resident of Village- Kadamdih, Thana- Sonahatu, P.O. & P.S.- Lowahatu & District- Ranchi.

¶535

Manish Kumar Singh, son of Binay Kumar Singh, resident of Q. No- 20/D, Booti Road, SSP House, Dindayal Nagar, P.O.Ranchi GPO, P.S.- Sadar & District- Ranchi.

¶536

Mukesh Kumar, son of Muneshwar Mahto, resident of P.O. & P.S.- B Nawadih, Burudih & District- Ranchi.

¶537

Suresh Chandra Mahto, son of Maheshwar Mahto, resident of Village- Jethadih, Amlesa, P.O. & P.S. & District- Ranchi.

¶538

Jitendra Oraon, son of Jagat Oraon, resident of Rukka, P.O.- Irba, P.S.- Ormanjhi, District- Ranchi.

¶539

Barnabas Kachhap, son of Lawrence Kachhap, resident of Near Airport, Hundru, Haratanr, P.O.- Hundru, P.S.- Doranda & District- Ranchi.

¶540

Prakash Kumar Mahto, son of Madhusudan Mahto, resident of Village- Ghaghra, Patrahatu, P.O. & P.S.- Patrahattu & District- Ranchi.

¶541

Kapil Kumar Mahato, son of Nagendra Mahato, resident of Ekra Basti Loyabad, Bansjora, P.O. & P.S.- Bansjora & DistrictDhanbad.

¶542

Naveen Kumar Das, son of Baburam Das, resident of Village- Ghuti, P.S.- Ghaghra, P.O.- Ruki & District- Gumla

¶543

Robin Guria, son of Narsingh Guria, resident of VillageSagjori, P.O.Jaraikela, P.S.Manoharpur, PanchayatMakranda & District- West Singhbhum.

¶544

Dipu Kumar Mahto, son of Bhushanlal Mahto, resident of Dudhkundi P.O, P.S. & District - West Singhbhum

¶545

Maheshwar Pradhan, son of Harish Chandra Pradhan, resident of Village- Bhalupani, P.O. & P.S.- Bhalupani, Karaikella & District - West Singhbhum.

¶546

¶547

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶548

Niranjan Kumar, son of Ramrati Prasad, resident of Haidar Nagar, Simarshot, Kukahi, P.O., P.S. & District- Palamu.

¶549

Ashok Kumar Baskey, son of Sunil Kumar Baskey, resident of P.O.- Gal Gal Tand, P.S.- Chandankiyari, Bansgari & District – Bokaro.

¶550

Kundan Kumar Gupta, son of Prameshwari Prasad Gupta, resident of Tarhasi, P.O. & P.S.- Tarhasi , District Palamu.

¶551

Binod Kumar Mahto, son of Saheb Mahto, resident of Village, P.O. & P.S.- Balsagra, Belsagra Churchu, District – Hazaribagh.

¶552

Abhishek Ranjan, son of Awadh .i Singh, resident of Seniar Mohalla Jori & P.O. P.S. & District – Chatra.

¶553

Asharam Mahto, son of Baijnath Mahto, resident of 03, Kenduwadih, P.S.- Silli, Near Power House, P.O.- Lota & District – Ranchi.

¶554

Ajay Prajapati, son of Kisun Prajapati, resident of VillageHutar, P.O. & P.S.- Hethpochara & District- Latehar.

¶555

Sudhir Kumar, son of Rajendra Yadav, resident of Village - Gulli, P.O.- Pitij, P.S.- Itkhori & District – Chatra.

¶556

Suresh Kumar, son of Biru Saw, resident of 41 B, Hariya, Chandwa, Alaudia, P.O., P.S. & District – Latehar.

¶557

Chintu Kumar Saw, son of Chhotan Saw, resident of Village, P.S. & P.O.- Sariya, District- Giridih.

¶558

Amit Verma, son of Degnarayan Pd Verma, resident of Village & P.O.-Parwatpur, P.S. – Ahilyapur & District – Giridih

¶559

Arun Kumar, son of Naresh Raut, resident of Panchayat - Jamdiha, Village - Parwatudih, P.O. & P.S.- Deori, District – Giridih.

¶560

Shashi Mahto, son of Shiv Ratan Mahto, resident of Hariom Tower, Nagra Toli, Circular Road, Lalpur & DistrictRanchi.

¶561

Vikram Singh, son of Suryadeo Singh, resident of Manika & P.O., P.S. & District – Latehar.

¶562

Sushma Kumari, daughter of Bhagirath Mahato, resident of Keduadih Basti, Bengabad , P.O., P.S. & District- Dhanbad.

¶563

Vijay Kumar, son of Narayan Gope, resident of Birajpur, P.S. & P.O.- Bengabad, District – Giridih.

¶564

Chandan Kumar Ray, son of Shankar Ray, resident of Village- Chorra, P.O.- Siyatand, P.S.- Jamua & District – Giridih.

¶565

Aditya Anand, son of Umesh Nand Tiwari, resident of Shiv Durga Mandir Lane, P.O. & P.S.- Ratu Road , District – Ranchi.

¶566

Vishal Kumar Gaurav, son of Uday Kumar Mishra, resident of Chai Bagan, P.O. & P.S- Namkum , District – Ranchi.

¶567

Kumari Premlata, daughter of Kundan Prasad, resident of Near Area Kandaakhaar, Hamidganj, Ward No.- 1, P.O. & P.S.Daltonganj , District – Palamu.

¶568

Gumeshwa Munda, son of Nirmal Munda, resident of Near Durga Mandir, Village- Hombai, P.O.- Neori, Vikash, P.S.Sadar Mesra & District – Ranchi.

¶569

Jagat Narayan Thakur, son of Om Prakash Thakur, resident of Hathi Khana Chowk, Kali Mandir Road, P.O. & P.S.-

¶570

¶571

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶572

Ranchi, District – Ranchi.

¶573

Vivek Xalxo, son of Budhai Xalxo, resident of VillageGundu, P.O. Hulhundu, P.S. - Hatia & District- Ranchi.

¶574

Mohammad Akhtar Ansari, son of Md. Khairun Ansari, resident of House No. A/293, Near Taslim Masjid, Gulmoher First Street, Tiwari Tank Road, Hind Piri, G.P.O. & P.S.Ranchi, & District – Ranchi.

¶575

Md. Aftab Khan, son of Abid Khan, resident of Village & P.O.- Chhencha, P.S. Latehar & District – Latehar.

¶576

Sajita Kumari, daughter of Sushil Kumar Singh, resident of Village & P.O.- Adar, P.S.- Ghaghra & District – Gumla.

¶577

Oskar Horo, son of Sukra Horo, resident of Road No. 01, Near Vikash Nagar, Kochatoli, Khijri, P.O. & P.S.- Namkum, District – Ranchi.

¶578

Varum Kumar, son of Dashrath Ram, resident of VillageBelangi, P.O.- Gutjora, P.S. – Khunti & District- Khunti.

¶579

Pankaj Kumar Nag, son of Ajay Hazam, resident of VillageHansa, P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District – Khunti.

¶580

Ajay Singh, son of Doman Singh, resident of Village- Torpa Road Khunti Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District – Khunti.

¶581

Amit Mahto, son of Bharat Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.- Ethe, P.S.- Murhu &District- Khunti.

¶582

Dinesh Mahto, son of Tulsi Mahto, resident of VillageEthe, P.O.+P.S.- Murhu & District – Khunti.

¶583

Ashok Ram, son of Mogal Ram, resident of P.O.- G Jaltanda, P.S.- Murhu, Village – Jaltanda & District- Khunti.

¶584

Upendra Kumar, son of Keshari Saw, resident of VillageSima Haphua, P.O.- Haphuwa, P.S.- Chatra & District – Chatra.

¶585

Manoranjan Kumar Choudhary, son of Shatrughan Choudhary, resident of Kumar Toli, Near Kanya Pathshala, Doranda, P.O. & P.S- Doranda, District – Ranchi.

¶586

Manu Kauriar, son of Mahru Kauriar, resident of VillageMaheshpur, P.O. & P.S. - Angara, District- Ranchi.

¶587

Ajit Kumar, son of Manu Prasad Gupta, resident of Ward20, Village-Tandwa, P.O. & P.S. - Garhwa, District- Garhwa.

¶588

Md. Shamsad Alam, son of Md. Mazhar Alam, resident of Village- Huppu, P.O.- Toyar, P.S. - Gola, Near Mosque, District – Ramgarh.

¶589

Abid Aslam, son of Rashid Aslam, resident of VillageHuppu, Near Raza Masjid, P.O. & P.S.- Gola, District – Ramgarh

¶590

Suman Prabhat Kujur, son of Ramesh Oraon, resident of Ward No.- 06, Village- Arru, P.O. & P.S. – Senha & District – Lohardaga.

¶591

Pawan Prakash Kujur, son of Pancham Kumar Bhagat, resident of Near ITI Ranchi, Pawa Toli, Hehal, P.O. & P.S.Hehal, District – Ranchi.

¶592

Pradeep Suman Tirkey, son of Sudhir Tirkey, resident of village-Khariyapara, P.O. Gumla, P.S.-Gumla, District-Gumla

¶593

Akash Munda, son of Nandu Munda, resident of Village

¶594

¶595

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶596

Janum, P.O. Angara, P.S. Angara, District-Ranchi.

¶597

Sunil Kumar, son of Shambhu Lal, resident of ward no. - 18, Janakpur Muhalla, P.O. - Tandwa, P.S. - Garhwa, District - Garhwa.

¶598

Gourab Kumar, son of Umesh Chandra Jha, resident of village - Mohanpur, P.O. - Mohanpur, P.S. - Mohanpur, District - Godda.

¶599

Rohit Kindo, son of Augustus Kindo, resident of Pallotti Nagar Tati, P.O. + P.S. -Kuru, Village - Tati, District - Lohardaga.

¶600

Vinod Toppo, son of Sukra Toppo, resident of village - Rampur, P.O. - Rajaulatu, P.S. - Rajaulatu, District - Ranchi.

¶601

Anil Kumar Ghansi, son of Bhikhu Ghansi, resident of Village Bundu, P.O. + P.S. Petarbar, District Bokaro.

¶602

Govind Kumar, son of Saryu Saw, resident of Near Lord Shiv Mandir, Village + P.O. - Chainpur, P.S. - Mandu, District - Ramgarh.

¶603

Dinesh Kumar, son of Adhar Chandra Aash, resident of Matri Chhaya, Sharda Colony, Power House Road, Chutiya, Behind Kali School, G.P.O. Ranchi, P.S.-Ranchi, District - Ranchi.

¶604

Rahul Kumar, son of Nunu Prasad Mehta, resident of villageBhusai, P.S. Ichak, District-Hazaribagh.

¶605

Manoranjan Kumar, son of Jogi Pahariya, resident of Panchayat - Bara Dumria, Village - Ghurmundani, P.O. Garapathar, P.S. Maslia, District - Dumka.

¶606

Mukesh Kumar, son of Ashok Kumar Saw, resident of Bank Colony, Vikash Nagar, Piska More, Ratu Road, P.O. - Hehal, P.S. - Hehal, District - Ranchi.

¶607

Rahul Kumar Choudhary, son of Lal Babu Choudhary, resident of Lal Babu Niwas, No-18. New Shastry Nagar, Madhukam, Gali No-01, P.O. Madhukam, P.S.-Sukhdev Nagar, District - Ranchi.

¶608

Raj Kishor Mahto, son of Raidas Mahto, resident of village - Sosodih, P.O. Baredih, P.S. - Tamar, District - Ranchi.

¶609

Yashpal Tirkey, son of Christopher Tirkey, resident of Village - Rengari, P.O. - Srinagar, P.S. - Jari, District - Gumla.

¶610

Dilip Tigga, son of Mathias Tigga, resident of Village - Gariyajor, P.O. - Kurdeg, P.S. - Kurdeg, District - Simdega.

¶611

Pintu Kumar Saw, son of Kesho Saw, resident of Village Asdhiya, P.O. Kamat, P.S. - Chatra, District Chatra.

¶612

Shubham Kumar Mahto, son of Khaita Mahto, resident of Village & P.O-Honhemodha, P.S. Mandu, District - Hazaribagh.

¶613

Vikas Kumar, son of Anil Kumar, resident of Muri Hill Bairagi, Ward No - 11, P.O. - Gaya, P.S. Gaya, District – Gaya.

¶614

Mohit Kumar, son of Jaikant Mandal, resident of Ward No14, Gali No-03, Maharshi Nagar, Menhi Nagar, P.O. - Godda, P.S. - Godda, District - Godda.

¶615

Mukesh Kumar, son of Titu Prasad Manjhi, resident of Makan No 43, Ward No-01, Near Kali Temple, Village - Hilaway, P.O. - Hilaway, P.S. - Pathargama, District - Godda.

¶616

Anup Kumar, son of Shankar Mandal, resident of Ward No -

¶617

¶618

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶619

2, Anand Marg School, Sarouni Bazar, P.O. - Sarouni Bazar, P.S. - Sarauni, District - Godda.

¶620

Mohan Pandit, son of Lilananad Pandit, resident of Village Malhara, P.O. Sarouni Bazar, P.S. Sarauni, District - Godda.

¶621

Ranjan Kumar, son of Rabindra Mandal, resident of Village Ampara, P.O. + P.S. Amrapahari, District - Dumka.

¶622

Abhishek Bara, son of Charwa Oraon, resident of Peace Road by Lane, Village - Lalpur, P.O. + P.S. - Lalpur, District - Ranchi.

¶623

Suraj Kumar Thakur, son of Om Prakash Thakur, resident of Village - Singhdaha, P.O. - Singhdaha, P.S.-Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.

¶624

Sintu Kumar Mandal, son of Jitu Mandal, resident of Village Kankomath, P.O. Kanko, P.S. - Katras, District - Dhanbad.

¶625

Lowrence Toppo, son of Gyan Prakash Toppo, resident of Village Masiatu, P.O. Masiatu, P.S. Latehar, District - Latehar.

¶626

Bipin Kumar Sahu, son of Radha Kishun Sahu, resident of Village - Murgu, P.O. - Murgu, P.S. - Sisai, District Gumla.

¶627

Ajita Toppo, daughter of Fagu Toppo, resident of Village - Karamtoli, P.O. + P.S. Gumla, District -Gumla.

¶628

Shweta Nayak, daughter of Anil Nayak, resident of Village - Shivnagar, Khuntitoli, P.O. - Khuntitoli, P.S.-Simdega, District - Simdega.

¶629

Jitendra Kumar, son of Birjnandan Prasad, resident of Near Shiv Mandir, Aamtand, Ratu, P.O. Ratu, P.S. Ratu, District - Ranchi.

¶630

Suman Kumar, son of Gorakh Nath Pandey, resident of House No. 86, Godarma Kalan, Nagar Parishad Bishrampur, P.O. Rehala, P.S. Bishrampur, District - Palamu.

¶631

Vikash Kumar, son of Fulchand Ganjhu, resident of Near Pahari Mandir, Kumhar Toli, Ratu Road, P.Ο. -Ratu, P.S. - Ratu, District - Ranchi.

¶632

Nitesh Kumar Tiwary, son of Pancham Tiwary, resident of Village + P.O. - Harinamad, P.S. - Chainpur, District - Palamu.

¶633

Gautam Kumar, son of Kanhai Yadav, resident of Aan An, P.O. - Lathehar, P.S. Lathehar, District -Latehar.

¶634

Nitesh Kumar Sahu, son of Naresh Sahu, resident of Village - Karam Toli, P.O. - Telgaon, P.S. - Gumla, District Gumla.

¶635

Ashish Anand Tirkey, son of Ajit Tirkey, resident of House No. 212, Ward No. 2, Thakur Toli, P.O.- Simdega, P.S. - Simdega, District - Simdega.

¶636

Sanjay Ohadar, son of Gaja Ohadar, resident of Village Umra, Thekratoli, Baghma, P.O.-Baghma, P.S. - Baghmara, District - Gumla.

¶637

Sanjay Kumar Minj, son of Jamedar Minj, resident of House No. 2, Forest Colony, Near Forest Office, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Chaibasa, District Pashchimi Singhbhum.

¶638

Noora Mamta Minj, daughter of Francis Minj, resident of C/O Nalin Ratnakar Toppo, 20240/B1/13, Behind AG Church School, Xavier Nagar, Dela Toli, Kokar, Bariatu, P.O. Bariatu, P.S. Bariatu, District - Ranchi.

¶639

Manoj Kumar, son of Sahdev Sahu, resident of Patia (Bazar

¶640

¶641

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶642

Tanr), P.O. Patia, P.S. Gumla, District Gumla.

¶643

Rahul Ranjan, son of Chandra Shekhar Singh, resident of Sukurhulu, P.O. - Sinjo, P.S. - Kuru, District - Lohardaga.

¶644

Pradeep Kumar Oraon, son of Etwa Oraon, resident of Village - Bhaldam Chatti, P.O. - Asni, P.S. -Gumla, District - Gumla.

¶645

Tulsi Sahu, son of Najendra Sahu, resident of Village - Kasira, P.O. - Patia, P.S. - Gumla, District - Gumla.

¶646

Kush Kumar, son of Hira Lal Shau, resident of Near Tarri School, P.O. Karondi, P.S. - Gumla, District-Gumla.

¶647

Shashi Bhushan Oraon, son of Soma Oraon, resident of Village - Soso More Kadamtoli, P.O. + P.S. - Gumla, District - Gumla.

¶648

Sakil Siddiquiee, son of Taswar Siddiquiee, resident of Village - Duriya, Datia, P.O. - Datia, P.S. -Gumla, District - Gumla.

¶649

Subhash Dhanwar, on of Jai Chand Dhanwar, resident of Village - Koyanjali Nawatoli, P.O. - Karanj, P.S. Bharno, District - Gumla.

¶650

Prabhu Prakash Oraon, son of Manga Oraon, resident of Bishunpur, Banari, P.O. Banari, P.S. -Bishunpur, District - Gumla.

¶651

Vivek Raj Sahu, son of Shiv Shankar Sahu, resident of Village - Kasira, P.O. - Patia, P.S. - Gumla, District Gumla.

¶652

Vikash Prasad, son of Ras .i Prasad, resident of Village - Toto, P.O. - Toto, P.S. - Gumla, District -Gumla.

¶653

Subhash Kumar Kamla, son of Vijay Kumar Kamla, resident of Village - Bargaon, P.O. - Bargaon, P.S. -Sisai, District - Gumla.

¶654

Shankar Paswan, son of Sagar Paswan, resident of Village Bhargaon, P.O. Jura, P.S. Gumla, District-Gumla.

¶655

Paduman Singh, son of Budram Singh, resident of Village - Konbir, P.O & P.S. - Basia, District - Gumla.

¶656

Vishal Kumar, son of Binay Kumar Deo, resident of Village - Kushmaha, P.O. - Deopur, P.S. - Jasidih, District - Deoghar.

¶657

Murari Kumar, son of Arun Mandal, resident of VillageJasobandh, P.O.-Mandankata, P.S.-Jasidih, District – Deoghar.

¶658

Sudhir Kumar Mahto, son of Nakul Mahto, resident of Village - Sarla Khurd, P.O. - Sagrampur, P.S.-Ramgarh, District - Ramgarh.

¶659

Mithlesh Kumar Mahto, son of Maniram Mahto, resident of Near Tata Motors, Shastri Nagar, P.O. -Dhanbad, P.S. - Bankmore, District - Dhanbad.

¶660

Upendra Kumar, son of Nageshwar Prajapati, resident of Govindpur, Near Hanuman Mandir, P.O. Mandu, P.S. Mandu, District - Ramgarh.

¶661

Sumit Kumar, son of Rajesh Kumar Rawani, resident of Village - Dubra, P.O. - Ramchandrapur, P.S. - Deoghar, District - Deoghar.

¶662

Shubham Kumar, son of Jai Prakash Yadav, resident of Radha Nagar, Pandra, P.O. Hehal, P.S. -Sukhdev Nagar, District - Ranchi.

¶663

Soni Linda, daughter of Gahanu Oraon, resident of Near Rock Garden, Misir Gonad, Bakain Kocha, Kanke Road, P.O. - Kanke, P.S. - Kanke, District - Ranchi.

¶664

¶665

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶666

Ravi Kumar, son of Laxmi Mahto, resident of Village - Gajni, P.O. - Gajni, P.S. - Kairo, District -Lohardaga.

¶667

Arbind Sahu, son of Brajesh Sahu, resident of Village - Tetar Bira, P.O. Karanj, P.S. - Bharno, District - Gumla.

¶668

Bitu Kumar, son of Nandu Sahu, resident of Village - Khargdiha, P.O. - Khargdiha, P.S. - Jamua, District - Giridih.

¶669

Pravin Kumar Yadav, son of Premchand Yadav, resident of House No. 111, Village Gumgi, P.O. -Gumgi, P.S. Tisari, District - Giridih.

¶670

Sikandar Kumar Yadav, son of Suresh Prasad Yadav, resident of Village-Katariyatand, P.O.-Dhuraita, P.S. - Hirodih, District - Giridih.

¶671

Ashish Yadav, son of Lalu Yadav, resident of Village - Manikbad, P.O. - Manikbad, P.S. - Deori, District Giridih.

¶672

Kamlesh Kumar, son of Mukhlal Mahto, resident of Village - Kenduwatand, Near Panchayat Bhawan, At-Mael, P.O. - Rajrappa, P.S. - Rajrappa, District - Ramgarh.

¶673

Sanjeet Kumar, son of Raju Yadav, resident of House No. 138, Village - Gumgi, P.O.-Gumgi, P.S. - Tisari, District - Giridih.

¶674

Biswajeet Kumar Paswan, son of Deo Narayan Paswan, resident of Village Karua Khurd, P.O. Rankabaulliya, P.S. - Garhwa, District - Garhwa.

¶675

Rajesh Kumar Mehta, son of Prabhu Prasad Mehta, resident of Village Adhaura, P.O. Banka, P.S. -Meral, District - Garhwa.

¶676

Sajjan Kumar Yadav, son of Sukhdew Yadav, resident of Village - Gumgi, P.O. - Gumgi, P.S.-Tisari, District Giridih.

¶677

Kumari Geetanjaly Mehra, daughter of Kumar Basant Prasad, resident of Village Bardahi, P.O. Patharadda, P.S. - Patharadda, District - Deoghar.

¶678

Sachin Shukla, son of Ashok Shukla, resident of Village - Sankha, P.O. - Ketat, P.S. - Rehla, District - Palamu.

¶679

Harshvardhan Bux Rai, son of Bishwajeet Bux Rai, resident of Near Sarweshwari Ashram, Block Road, Nawadih Kalan, P.O. Bishrampur, P.S. - Bishrampur, District - Palamu.

¶680

Md Tanweer Alam, son of Md Maswood Alam, resident of House No. 12, Ward No. 04, Ρ.Ο. Madhupur, P.S. - Madhupur, District - Deoghar.

¶681

Neeraj Kumar, son of Kuldeep Ram, resident of P.O. + P.S. Ichak, Village Hadari, District Hazaribagh.

¶682

Divyanath Ram, Son of Loknath Ram, resident of VillageKundagada, P.O. - Champijaria, P.S.-Barkichanpi, DistrictLohardaga.

¶683

Bijendra Kumar, son of Upendra Singh, resident of Prince Chouk, Village Saldega, P.O. + P.S. Simdega, District - Simdega.

¶684

Perlok Kumar, son of Kapil Prasad, resident of Husainabad, Ward No. 5, P.O.+P.S.-Husainabad, Ariari, DistrictSheikhpura.

¶685

Mukesh Kumar, son of Bashudeo Das, resident of House No. 32, Ward No. 12, Bherwa Nawadih, P.O. - Madhupur, P.S. - Madhupur, District - Deoghar.

¶686

¶687

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶688

Sukumar Pramanik, son of Kamlakant Pramanik, resident of Tangar Toli, P.O. + P.S. - Bundu, District Ranchi.

¶689

Shashank Shekhar, son of Kameshwar Prasad, resident of Street - Indra Nagar, Road No. - 01, Bangali Tola, Landmark - Near Munna Lodge, Village - Phulwari, P.O. - Phulwari, P.S. - Phulwari, District – Patna.

¶690

Vandana Sahu, daughter of Braj Kishor Sahu, resident of B.I.D. Basar Toli, P.O. - Lohardaga, P.S. -Lohardaga, District - Lohardaga.

¶691

Dheeraj Kumar Paswan, son of Sahdeo Paswan, resident of Choti Masjid, Laheri Tola, M-56, P.O. Chitarpur, P.S. - Chitarpur, District - Ramgarh.

¶692

Anita Kumari Minz, daughter of Mohan Minz, resident of Dugra Mandir Street, Kokar, Chuna Bhatta, V.T.C. Kokar, P.O. - Kokar, P.S. Kokar, District - Ranchi.

¶693

Navneet Kumar, son of Awadhesh Mehta, resident of Village Kharagpur, Dhab Kalan, P.O. Kharagpur, P.S. - Kharagpur, District - Palamu.

¶694

Amod Kumar, son of Kramdeo Yadav, resident of Village Tetariya, P.O. Kurhat, P.S. Hariharganj, District - Palamu.

¶695

Jeetendra Kumar, son of Shavind Singh, resident of Lohra, Dumri, P.O. - Dumari, P.S. - Dumari, District – Lakhisarai.

¶696

Himanshu Toppo, son of Theodor Toppo, resident of Kadru Pul Toli, North, P.O. - Doranda, P.S. -Argora, Near New Over Bridge, District - Ranchi.

¶697

Md Meraj, son of Md Seraj, resident of 4 No., Lalpaniya Road, Kamdhenu Petrol Pump, Bhadwa Banker, P.O. - Ramgarh, P.S. - Ramgarh, District - Ramgarh.

¶698

Vivek Kumar Sinha, son of Vijay Kumar Sinha, resident of Road No. 8, Ketari Bagan, P.O. - Namkum, P.S.-Namkum, District - Ranchi.

¶699

Padmini, daughter of Arbind Kumar, resident of 69, Santosh Bhawan, State Bank Road, Makatpur, P.O. - Giridih, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶700

Deepesh Rajwar, son of Harikishun Rajwar, resident of Agar Toli, Bakshidih, P.O. - Bakshidih, P.S. - Ranchi, District - Ranchi.

¶701

Hiralal Yadav, son of Fulchand Yadav, resident of GMT 37, Govindpur C, Bokaro Thermal, P.Ο. – Gobindpur, P.S. - Gobindpur, District - Bokaro.

¶702

Suraj Sahu, son of Brijmohan Sahu, resident of Village Masmano, P.O. Bhandra, P.S.-Lohardaga, Sahu Toli, Masmano Thakurgaon, District-Lohardaga.

¶703

Rahul Kumar, son of Hiralal Mahto, resident of 77 C, Chargi, P.O. - Chargi, P.S. - Chargi, District - Bokaro.

¶704

Vijay Kumar Singh, son of Mukti Nath Singh, resident of Gayanti Niwas, Gitil Kocha, P.O.-Kokar, P.S.-Kokar, District - Ranchi.

¶705

Chandra Shekhar Kashyap, son of Manoj Kashyap, resident of Village Jobhiya, P.O.-Banda, P.S.-Gola, District - Ramgarh.

¶706

Saroj Kumari, daughter of Soma Oraon, resident of P.O. - Gurugain, P.S. Burmu, Patratoli, District -Ranchi.

¶707

¶708

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶709

Romit Bhaskar, son of Mahesh Prasad, resident of Panchayat - Makdiha, Block - Dhanwar, Village Chandranagar, P.O.-Kubri, P.S.-Dhanwar & District-Giridih.

¶710

Manohar Kumar Sharma, son of Rohini Sharma, resident of P.O.-Chandra, P.S-Chandankiyari, Udalbani, District-Bokaro.

¶711

Rahul Ranjan, son of Mahabir Mahto, resident of Village Tantri South, P.O. Tupkadih, P.S. Jaridih, District - Bokaro.

¶712

Md. Amir Suhail, son of Md. Taslim Ahmad, resident of Kokdoro, P.O. Kokdoro, P.S. - Kokdoro, District - Ranchi.

¶713

Ajhar Alam, son of Abdul Wahab, resident of P.O. Kokdoro, P.S. Kokdoro, District - Ranchi.

¶714

Chandan Kumar Yadav, son of Bhikhan Mahto, resident of Panchayat - Jaridih, Village + P.O. - Janta, P.S.Birni, District - Giridih.

¶715

Amarjeet Malakar, son of Anil Malakar, resident of Dari, P.O. Simariya, P.S. Simariya, District -Chatra.

¶716

Purushottam Singh, son of Surendra Singh, resident of Village - Majhigawan, P.O. Tarhasi, P.S. -Tarhasi, District - Palamu.

¶717

Ajit Kumar Karmali, son of Shakun Karmali, resident of 1A/156, Subhash Nagar, P.O. - Amlo, P.S. -Bermo, District - Bokaro.

¶718

Rajesh Mahto, son of Makhan Lal Mahto, resident of Village + P.O. - Balsagra, P.S. - Balsogra, District - Hazaribagh.

¶719

Rahul Kumar, son of Shrikishun Sahu, resident of Murgu, P.O. - Sisai, P.S. - Sisai, District - Gumla.

¶720

Dileep Kumar Mahto, son of Saheb Mahto, resident of Near High School, P.O. - Balsagra, P.S. Churchu, District - Hazaribagh.

¶721

Ajay Oraon, son of Ayata Oraon, resident of Village Garhagaon, P.O. Garhagaon, P.S. Garhagaon, District - Ranchi.

¶722

Rahul Kumar, son of Deelip Kumar, resident of 114, Amnari, Silwar Khurd, P.O. Silwar Khurd, P.S.Silwar Khurd, District - Hazaribagh.

¶723

Vivek Kumar Yadav, son of Ishwary Prasad Yadav, resident of Matnag, P.O. Panki, P.S. Panki, District - Palamu.

¶724

Ranjeet Kumar Singh, son of Bramhdeo Singh, resident of Village Sildiliya Kalan, P.O. Sildiliya Kalan, P.S.Tarhasi, District - Palamu.

¶725

Ajay Kumar Singh, son of Bhagee Singh, resident of Tola Bankheta, Village - Panki, P.O. + P.S. - Panki, District Palamu.

¶726

Manoj Kumar, son of Punat Mochi, resident of Village - Basdiha, P.O. - Dandarkala, P.S. - Panki, District Palamu.

¶727

Prasoon Kumar, son of Birendra Kumar Pandey, resident of C/O - Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, Near Marwari College, Village + P.O. + P.S. Panki, District - Palamu.

¶728

Juhi Kumari, daughter of Dhirendra Pandey, resident of Village Bachdohar, P.O. - Tetarai, P.S. -Panki, District - Palamu.

¶729

Arun Kumar Choudhary, son of Satyanarayan Choudhary, resident of Village Jarka, P.O. Kadhwan, P.S. Bishrampur,

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

District – Palamu.

Gaurav Kumar, son of Sanjeev Pandey, resident of near Vivek for Vikash, Village + P.O. Sudna, P.S. Medininagar, DistrictPalamu.

¶734

Deepak Kumar, son of Lal .i Singh, resident of Village - Sundipur, P.O. - Sundipur, P.S. - Kandi, District Garhwa.

¶735

Praful Kumar Singh, son of Satyendra Singh, resident of Village - Jaidu, P.O. - Udayapura, P.S. Tarhasi, District - Palamu.

¶736

Manish Kumar, son of Sachchida Ram, resident of Kariahar, P.O. Gahar Pathara, P.S. Gahar Pathara, District - Palamu.

¶737

Sushil Kumar, son of Nandkishor Ram, resident of Village Jaymarn, P.O. Patan, P.S. Patan, District - Palamu.

¶738

Bimlesh Kumar, son of Ganesh Ram, resident of Village Kaudiya, P.O. Gharatiya, P.S. Bishrampur, District - Palamu.

¶739

Rajan Kumar, son of Ram Deo Ram, resident of Gram Amba, P.O. Hariharganj, P.S.-Hariharganj, District-Palamu.

¶740

Sanju Kumari, daughter of Sakaldeep Prajapati, resident of Village - Chatti Sinduria, P.O. - Jhabar, P.S. Sinduria, District - Palamu.

¶741

Vikash Kumar Yadav, son of Mandev Yadav, resident of Village Kasiyar, P.O. - Ratnag, P.S. Hussainabad, District Palamu.

¶742

Abhishek Kumar Paswan, son of Rishi Manjhi, resident of 161, Ward No 8, Village Pokharaha Khurd, P.O. - Rajwadih, P.S. - Medininagar, District - Palamu.

¶743

Aakash Kumar, son of Adar Manjhi, resident of Village & P.OPokhraha Khurd, P.S. Medininagar, District - Palamu.

¶744

Animesh Kumar Mishra, son of Sachchidanand Mishra, resident of Village Lohra, P.O. Garikh Garikhas, P.S. - Pandwa, District-Palamu.

¶745

Harish Chandra Chaudhary, son of Deelip Chaudhary, resident of Village, P.O. & P.S.- Chainpur, District-Palamu.

¶746

Mukesh Kumar Ram, Son of Suresh Ram, resident of Near Shiv Mandir, Badal Chowk, Barka Kalan, Ratanpur, P.O., P.S. & District - Hazaribagh.

¶747

Anita Kumari, daughter of Ram Prasad Singh, resident of Village - Banjari, P.O. + P.S. Bhanidaria, District Garhwa.

¶748

Pradeep Prasad, son of Mahavir Sao, resident of Tola Bhandar, Village - Kelhar, P.O. - Patan, P.S. -Patan, District - Palamu.

¶749

Shekhar Sudhanshu Pandit, son of Pachchu Pandit, resident of Village Khajuri, P.O. Kanjia, P.S. Bhandaria, District - Garhwa.

¶750

Kartik Kumar, son of Ambika Ram, resident of Village Gamhariya, P.O. Japla, P.S. Hussainabad, District - Palamu.

¶751

Santosh Ram, son of Harihar Ram, resident of Village + P.O. Raji, P.S. Kharaundhi, District -Garhwa.

¶752

Samiksha Gupta, daughter of Prabhu Dayal Gupta, resident of Near Old Gurudwara, P.O. & P.S.-Daltonganj, District - Palamu.

¶753

Bablu Kumar, son of Deenanath Singh, resident of Village -

¶754

¶755

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶756

Patariya Khurd, P.S. & P.O. - Chainpur, District - Palamu.

¶757

Rakesh Kumar Yadav, son of Kedar Yadav, resident of Village Simarsot, P.O. Kukhi, P.S. Haidernagar, District - Palamu.

¶758

Niraj Kumar Bhagat, son of Ajay Kumar Bhagat, resident of Village - Hariyari, P.S. & P.O. - Poraiyahat, District - Godda.

¶759

Gourav Kumar, son of Congress Prasad Yadav, resident of Village - Pagwara, Paschim Patti, P.O. & P.S. - Hansdiha, District - Dumka.

¶760

Sona Lal Pandit, son of Rajendra Pandit, resident of Jay Nagar Piper Joriya, Nonbatta, P.O., P.S. & District - Godda.

¶761

Abdullah Ansari, son of Md Safir Ansari, resident of P.S. & P.O. - Sariayahat, Nawadih, District - Dumka.

¶762

Tripurari Yadav, son of Ghanshyam Yadav, resident of 46, 04 Pakariya Ghat, P.O., P.S. & District - Godda.

¶763

Devjeet Das, son of Subhasis Das, resident of Shivpahar Road, Sonwadangal, P.O., P.S. & District - Dumka.

¶764

Kundan Kumar Chourasia, son of Kangres Prasad Chourasia, resident of Village Petsar, P.O. Petsar, P.S.-Jarmundi, District - Dumka

¶765

Sambhu Rajak, son of Suresh Rajak, resident of P.O. Shiv Pahad, P.S. Dumka Town, Sonwadangal, District - Dumka.

¶766

Nitu Kumari, daughter of Santosh Kumar Mandal, resident of P.O. - Jamjori, P.S. - Hansdiha, Village -Jamjori, Birnia, District - Dumka.

¶767

Vikash Kumar Pandit, son of Hiralal Pandit, resident of Sonajori, Kumhar Tola, P.O.,& P.S.-Bhognadih, District Sahebganj.

¶768

Ashish Kumar Mandal, son of Rabindra Kumar Mandal, resident of P.O. & P.S. Jarmundi, Village - Bargo, District - Dumka.

¶769

Shreemant Kumar, son of Mukti Pada Mandal, resident of Village & P.O.-Chhot Asna, P.S. Fatehpur, District-Jamtara.

¶770

Mahesh Kumar, son of Kamal Kishor Mandal, resident of Purana Dumka, Kewat Para, Sonwadangal, P.O., P.S. & District - Dumka.

¶771

Md Samiruddin Ansari, son of Md Samiruddin Ansari, resident of P.O. - Astajora, P.S. - Kathikhund, P.O. & P.S. - Madhuban, District - Dumka.

¶772

Amit Kumar Choudhary, son of Sambhu Choudhary, resident of Mirjachauki, Mahadevwarn,P.O. & P.S. -Mandro, District - Sahebganj.

¶773

Md Mudassir Ansari, son of Md Maqbul Ansari, resident of Village Sidpahari, P.O. Chhalapathar, P.S.Masalia, District - Dumka.

¶774

Md Shahzahan Ansari, son of Md Kurban Ansari, resident of Village - Sidpahari, P.O. - Chhalapathar, P.S. Masalia, District - Dumka.

¶775

Musarraf Hussian, son of Md Taleb Ansari, resident of P.O. - Chhaila Pathar, P.S. - Jama, District -Dumka.

¶776

Manoj Hembrom, son of Kistu Hembrom, resident of P.O. - Machakhicha, P.S. - Dumka Muffasil, Village Bhikha, District - Dumka.

¶777

¶778

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶779

Bholanath Saha, son of Harendra Saha, resident of Dhobadanga, P.O., P.S. & District - Pakur.

¶780

Bheem Besra, son of Patwari Besra, resident of Village Tand, District - Godda. Salga Tanar, P.O. Padampur, P.S.-Salga Tand, District-Godda.

¶781

Vikas Kumar, son of Bijay Prasad Sah, resident of P.O. Bando Haripur, P.S. Muffasil, Village Dharbhnga, District - Dumka.

¶782

Premnandan Kumar Sah, son of Jai Narayan Sah, resident of Sarkanda, P.O., P.S. & District -Godda.

¶783

Ghanshyam Kumar, son of Lagan Prasad Sah, resident of Chinadhab, P.O., P.S. & District -Godda.

¶784

Sentu Kumar Mandal, son of Gholtan Mandal, resident of village-Ghatpahar Pur, P.S. & P.O-Mohanpur, District-Godda.

¶785

Santosh Kumar Pandit, son of Bhubneshwar Pandit, resident of Village - Gangta Khurd, Karpuri Nagar B, Sarkanda, Ward No. 21, P.O. & P.S.-Godda, District -Godda.

¶786

Subhash Kumar, son of Khirodhar Mahto, resident of Beech Tola, Village - Champi, P.O., P.S. & District - Bokaro.

¶787

Kamlesh Kumar, son of Kailash Thakur, resident of Village Fulwar, P.O. & P.S.- Poraiyahat, District Godda.

¶788

Hemant Kumar Thakur, son of Lakhan Lal Thakur, resident of Village Sakri Phulwar, P.O. & P.S.-Poraiyahat, District-Godda.

¶789

Rakesh Kumar, son of Santosh Ram Das, resident of Village, P.O. & P.S.-Poraiyahat, District - Godda.

¶790

Shyam Kumar Tudu, son of Nasib Tudu, resident of Village - Daharlangi, P.O. & P.S.- Paraspani, District -Godda.

¶791

Birendra Murmu, son of Marang Murmu, resident of Village Godda. Matihani, P.Ο. & P.S.-Tardiha, District-Godda.

¶792

Mahesh Kisku, son of Upendra Kisku, resident of Village, P.O. & P.S. Paraspani, District - Godda.

¶793

Prashant Kumar Pandey, son of Daninath Pandey, resident of Kuldeep Singh Road, P.O., P.S. & District - Godda.

¶794

Amrit Pratyay, son of Satyendra Kumar Sinha, resident of P.O. + P.S. Dumka, Dudhani, District Dumka.

¶795

Manish Thakur, son of Pramod Thakur, resident of Village Bada Bandh, Rasikpur, Sonwadangal, P.O.Dumka, P.S. Dumka, District - Dumka.

¶796

Kapildeo Das, son of Khudu Rabidas, resident of Village Manikbad, P.O. + P.S. Manikabad, District - Giridih.

¶797

Namit Kumar Das, son of Sadanand Ravidaa, resident of Ambedkar Yuva Club, Manikabad, P.O. + P.S.Manikabad, District - Giridih.

¶798

Sitaram Pandey, son of Balgovind Pandey, resident of Village - Dhibiyadih, P.O. - Khesmi, P.S. -Markachcho, District - Koderma, Pin - 825418.

¶799

Umashankar Verma, son of Ramneshwar Prasad Verma, resident of Village - Malidih, P.O. - Siyatand, P.S.-Jamua, District - Giridih.

¶800

Khushbu Kumari, daughter of Jodho Ram, resident of Village - Pokhariya, Panchayat - Pokhariya, P.O. - Beko, P.S. Bagodar, District - Giridih.

¶801

Md Aalam Ansari, son of Md Sarfuddin Ansari, resident of

¶802

¶803

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶804

Village - Patardih Chiromahua, Panchayat - Remba, Block - Jamua, P.O. Remba, P.S. Hirodoh, District - Giridih.

¶805

Chandan Kumar Sinha, son of Bhagwati Charan Prasad, resident of Village-Sarpata, P.O. Sarath, P.S.-Sarwan, District - Deoghar.

¶806

Pankaj Kumar, son of Binod Yadav, resident of Village-Bairia, P.O.-Bairia, P.S. - Dewri, District-Giridih.

¶807

Manish Rao, son of Badri Das, resident of Rajendra Nagar, P.S. & P.O.- Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶808

Chiranjivi Prasad Saw, son of Ramlal Saw, resident of Village - Pratappur, P.O. - Ranikhawa, P.S. Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶809

Santosh Kumar Sahu, son of Arjun Saw, resident of Village - Manikbad, P.O. - Manikbad, P.S. - Deori, District - Giridih.

¶810

Prakash Kumar Gupta, son of Shankar Saw, resident of Village - Manikbad, P.O. - Manikbad, P.S. - Deori, District - Giridih.

¶811

Pintu Prasad Verma, son of Mangar Mahto, resident of Ward No. 4, P.O. Markacho, P.S. Markacho, Village - Nawadih, District - Koderma.

¶812

Vipul Kumar Vikal, son of Yogendra Kumar, resident of Village Gardih, P.O. - Jantajaridih, P.S. -Birni, District - Giridih.

¶813

Md Nishat Alam, son of Noushad Alam, resident of Village - Khorimahua, Panchayat - Garjasaran, Block - Dhanwar, P.O. - Khorimahua, P.S. - Dhanwar, District - Giridih.

¶814

Pankaj Kumar Verma, son of Umesh Prasad Verma, resident of Village - Karihari, P.O. - Karihari, P.S.-Hirodih, District - Giridih.

¶815

Dilip Kumar Saw, son of Ramji Saw, resident of Village - Karihari, Block - Jamua, P.O. - Karihari, P.S.Hirodih, District - Giridih.

¶816

Bhadaur Malakar, son of Rampti Mali, resident of Village - Jaridih, Panchayat - Jaridih, Block - Birni, P.O. - Janata Jaridih, P.S. Birni, District - Giridih.

¶817

Md Zabed Ansari, son of Md Abdul Ansari, resident of House No. 12, Chahal, Near Middle School, P.O. & P.S.-Chatro, District - Giridih.

¶818

Pawan Kumar Ray, son of Kamdeo Ray, resident of Village - Khoto, P.O. Chatro, P.S. - Bhelwaghato, District - Giridih.

¶819

Kamdev Sha, son of Binod Sah, resident of Village Kosogondodighi, P.O. Chatro, P.S. Deori, District - Giridih.

¶820

Sanjay Sahu, son of .i Sahu, resident of Village Kosogondodighi, P.O. + P.S. Chatro, District Giridih.

¶821

Shivanand Yadav, son of Prakash Yadav, resident of Village - Mahuwatand, P.O. - Abjto, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶822

Raghunandan Yadav, son of Prakash Prasad Yadav, resident of Village – Mahuwatand, P.O.-Abjto, P.S.-Giridih, DistrictGiridih.

¶823

Pappu Kumar Yadav, son of Ram Lakhan Yadav, resident of Village - Kajmunda, P.O. Chikanadih, P.S.-Deori, District - Giridih.

¶824

Anil Kumar Yadav, son of Gopi Kishan Yadav, resident of Village-Godeyatamaran, P.O.-Murna, P.S.-Dhanwar, District -

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

Giridih.

Sneh Prakash, Son of Lakshman Prasad Gupta, resident of House No. 147, Police Line, P.O. - Giridih, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶829

Rohit Kumar Pathak, son of Tulsi Prasad Pathak, resident of Village - Gardih, P.O.-Ghoranjee, P.S.-Deori, District - Giridih.

¶830

Ajay Kumar, son of Krishna Mandal, resident of Village - Nagar Keshwari, P.O. Keshwari, P.S. -Sariya, District - Giridih.

¶831

Mandeep Kumar, son of Baghmber Mohan Sinha, resident of Near Raja Bangla, P.O. - Giridih, Buxidih Road, P.S.-Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶832

Ishwar Das, son of Mani Das, resident of Village - Khandiha, P.O. - S.P. Colyari, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶833

Manish Kumar Rawani, son of Dhapru Rawani, resident of Village - Chakradaha, P.O. - Chapuwadih, P.S.-Bengabad, District - Giridih.

¶834

Kunal Kumar Gupta, son of Pratap Prasad Gupta, resident of Laxmi Mohalla, Bada Chowk, P.S. & P.O.-Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶835

Basudeo Das, son of Harilal Das, resident of Village - Bagjobra, P.O. - Baniyadih, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶836

Purushotam Kumar Ray, son of Mahesh Ray, resident of Hasingraydih, P.O.-Budhiyadih, P.S. -Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶837

Rajesh Kumar, son of Nakul Choudhary, resident of House No. 15, Charghara, Near P.N. Bank, P.Ο. -Charghara, P.S. - Jamua, District - Giridih.

¶838

Birendra Kumar Das, son of Bheru Ravidas, resident of Lebour Office, P.O. - Giridih, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶839

Nandita Pandey, daughter of Sanjay Kumar Pandey, resident of Dasdih, P.O. Gandey, P.S. -Gandey, District - Giridih.

¶840

Sikendra Kumar Verma, son of Ritlal Prasad Verma, resident of House No. 11, Panchayat - Haria, Village - Ramusharan, P.O. - Mandro, P.S. - Deori, District Giridih.

¶841

Sachindeo Kumar, son of Sukhdeo Prasad Verma, resident of Village - Bhaluwahi, P.O. - Chiknadih, P.S.-Deori, District - Giridih.

¶842

Prasant Kumar, son of Deepak Kumar Deepak, resident of House No. 01, Professor Colony, Near Women's College, P.O.Giridih, P.S.-Giridih, District-Giridih.

¶843

Sunil Prasad Kushwaha, son of Prakash Mahto, resident of Village + P.O. Digwar, P.S. - Mandu, District - Ramgarh.

¶844

Kumari Neera, daughter of Late Nilkanth Prasad Lala, resident of W/O Sanjeev Kumar Sinha, Katras Bazar, Lala Tola, Shamdih, P.O.-Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.

¶845

Manik Chandra Mahatha, son of Anil Chandra Mahatha, resident of Village - Lalpur, P.O. - Kumirdova, Chandan Kiyari, P.S. - Bokaro, District - Bokaro.

¶846

Upendra Pandey, son of Sudarshan Pandey, resident of Near Aircel Tawar, Village-Bankali Mandir Road, P.O. - Govindpur, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.

¶847

Triveni Kumar Mahatha, son of Shankar Mahatha, resident of

¶848

¶849

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶850

P.O. Narayanpur, P.S. - Pindrajora, Village - Kamaldih, District - Bokaro.

¶851

1. Manoj Kumar Mahato, son of Loknath Mahato, resident of Near Shiv Mandir, Pathra Gora, Panderpala, P.O.-Bishunpur, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.

¶852

1. Preety Verma, daughter of Shyam Verma, resident of Fatehpur Lane, Jharia, Jharna, P.O. - Jharia, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.

¶853

1. Razak Ansari, son of Jamiruddin Ansari, resident of Raghunathpur, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. Govindpur, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.

¶854

1. Subhash Mahato, son of Rushan Mahato, resident of House No. 292, Village - Pathar Kata Side, P.O. -Chas, P.S.-Bokaro, District - Bokaro.

¶855

1. Sunita Kumari, daughter of Nimai Chandra Rawani, resident of Narodih, P.O. - Ambona, P.S. -Khilkanali, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶856

1. Subhash Chandra Mahato, son of Phalu Mahato, resident of Vill.-Orbhitha Parsabaniya, P.O.-Khasjinagoda, P.S. - Suranga, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶857

1. Shubham Raj, son of Shailendra Kumar, resident of Flat G/B Nirmal Tower Apartment, Saraidhela Main Road, P.K. Roy College, Veer Kunwar Singh Colony, Dhaiya, P.O. - Indian School of Mines, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶858

Satya Deo Das, son of Laldhari Das, resident of Back of Tata Tower, Nutandih, Jagjiwan Nagar, P.O.-Dhanbad, P.S.Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶859

Pramjeet Kumar, son of Yogendra Prasad, resident of Near Bhagat Ji Mandir, Manaitand, P.O. -Manaitand, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶860

Chandan Kumar Saw, son of -, resident of Near Hanuman Mandir, Kurmidih, Chhotpichhri, P.O.-Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶861

Dhananjay Kumar, son of Subhash Chandra, resident of Mahabir Nagar, Near India Tower, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶862

Prem Shankar Rajak, son of Bhola Rajak, resident of Bhagabandh, P.O. - Bhagabandh, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶863

Ajay Kumar Rajak, son of Butan Rajak, resident of P.O. - Kankomath, P.S. - Katras, Gargaria, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶864

Rahul Kumar Jha, son of Shankar Sharan Jha, resident of c/o - Surendra Singh, Chiragora, Samshan Road, Hirapur, Near Bhagwati Jagrit Mandir, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S.-Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶865

Bikash Kumar Yadav, son of Balkrishan Yadav, resident of Vill.- Guglidih, Ward No. 16, P.O. -Satsang, P.S. - Deoghar, District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶866

Nishu Kumar Sinha, son of Nand Kishor Prasad Sinha, resident of Vill.-Daraysharan, P.O. - Naya Sankho, P.S. -

¶867

¶868

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶869

Deori, District - Giridih, Jharkhand.

¶870

Prakash Das, son of Rawan Das, resident of Vill. - Chandpur, P.O. - Daburgram, P.S. - Jasidih, District -Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶871

Ravi Kumar, son of Binod Kumar Rajak, resident of Baradih, P.O. Bhendra, P.S. Bokaro, District -Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶872

Kunal Kumar, son of Krishn Kant Goswami, resident of Loco Bazar, Hariharpur, P.S. & P.O. - Gomo, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶873

Md. Ashfaque Nayeem, son of Md. Nayeem Ul Haque, resident of 47 Niche Kulhi, Near Mini ITI Jharia, Jharna, P.O. Jharia, P.S.-Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶874

Arun Prasad Saw, son of Bhanu Prasad Saw, resident of Vill.Hariyadih, P.O.-Kalyanpur, P.S. Barwadda, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶875

Tarakant Sardar, son of Thakur Das Sardar, resident of P.O. - Pundru, P.S. - Pindrajora, Alokdih (Barshabad), District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶876

Pradeep Kumar Das, son of Badal Kumar Das, resident of Vill.- Amjhar, P.O. - Baliapur, P.S. - Baliapur, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶877

Pankaj Marandi, son of Mahadev Marandi, resident of Tetulia, Susunliya, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶878

Niharika Singh, daughter of Rajendra Kumar Singh, resident of Akash Kinari, Panchrukhi, Katrasgarh, P.O. Katrasgarh, P.S. Katras, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶879

Bablu Kumhar, Aged son of Rameshwar Kumhar, resident of Kamta, Madaidih, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S. -Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶880

Rahul Kumar, son of Mritunjay Pandey, resident of Yadav Tola, Korkotta, Hariharpur, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S.-Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶881

Sanjeev Kumar Murmu, son of Moti Lal Murmu, resident of Vill.-Bhimkanali, Khanoodih, Baghmara, VTC-Matigara, Katras, P.O. & P.S.-Katras, District -Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶882

Chatur Hansda, son of Rasik Hansda, resident of P.O. Khario, P.S. Barora, Sogedih, District -Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶883

Krishna Marandi, son of Hariram Manjhi, resident of Vill.Jamdiha, P.S. Mahuda, Lohpiti, P.O. Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶884

Ruma Kumari, daughter of Raghav Kumbhakar, resident of Vill-Kharkabad, P.O. - Barwa East, P.S. Govindpur, Parasi, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶885

Varsha Rani, daughter of Binod Prasad Mahto, resident of Narkopi, Dumdumi, Alias, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶886

Pramod Kumar, son of Dilip Kumar Singh, resident of Vill - Lulutand, P.O. - Galgaltand, Chandan Kiyari, P.S. - Chandan Kiyari, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶887

Sonamani Kumari, daughter of Tarapad Sharma, resident of M No-75, P.O. -Chiksiya, P.S. - Chas MU Chiksiya, District -

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

Bokaro, Jharkhand.

Sujit Kumar, son of Ram Chandra Ram, resident of Rani Road Bhuda, Shivpuri Colony, P.O. Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶892

Nirmal Mahato, son of Dinbandhu Mahato, resident of Vill. & P.O - Kaljharia, Geria, P.S.-Jamtara, District -Jamtara, Jharkhand.

¶893

Rakesh Kumar Mahto, son of Binanda Mahto, resident of Vill.Kalajhariya, P.O. & P.S. - Geria, Jamtara, District - Jamtara, Jharkhand.

¶894

Madhusudan Pandit, son of Shashti Pandit, resident of Vill.Bhogikata, VTC + P.O. - Geria, Sub Dist-Nala, P.S.-Nala, District-Jamtara.

¶895

Bhudev Kumar Singh, son of Baikunth Nath Singh, resident of Vill.- Kalajharia, P.O.-Geria, P.S.-Nala, District - Jamtara, Jharkhand.

¶896

Ranjit Kumar Pandit, son of Satish Pandit, resident of Bhogikata, Shripur, P.O. Geria, P.S. Nala, District-Jamtara, Jharkhand.

¶897

Sanjay Kumar, son of Narwadeshwar Pandey, resident of H.No. 86, Prabhat Colony, P.O. - Chas, P.S.-Chas, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶898

Mukesh Kumar Mahato, son of Nilkanth Mahato, resident of P.O. - Rangamatiya, P.S. - Chandankiyari, Alokdih, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶899

Rajeev Kumar, son of Amulya Kumar, resident of Shankardi, Ρ.Ο.-Dhanbad, P.S. Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶900

Parikshit Singh, son of Anant Kumar Singh Choudhary, resident of Kura, P.O.-Labudih, P.S.-Bokaro, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶901

Ram Kishun Mahto, Aged about 31 years, Son of Nageshwar Mahto, Resident of Vill Hariyadih, P.O. Kalyanpur, P.S. - Govindpur, Barwadda, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶902

Rajkumar Saw, son of Manejar Mahato, resident of Vill - Udaypur, P.O. - Kalyanpur, P.S. - Govindpur, Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶903

Uttam Kumar Mahato, son of Jaleshwar Mahato, resident of Kachhi Balihari, P.O. & P.S.- Kusunda, Near Shakti School, Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶904

Chandni Kumari, daughter of Maheswar Manjhi, resident of H.No.-69, near Shiv Mandir, Vill.-Rangadih, P.O.Pradhankhanta, P.S. - Topchanchi, Gopalpur, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶905

Kundan Kumar, son of Suresh Prasad Singh, resident of 207/D, Hill Colony, Near Railway Hospital, P.O.-Dhanbad, P.S.Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶906

Mritunjay Kumar Choudhary, son of Jawahar Lal Choudhary, Resident of Tundi, P.O. - Tundi, P.S. -Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶907

Manjesh Kumar Mahatha, son of Thakur Prasad Mahatha, resident of H.No. 7, Bhandhagora, P.O. -Chas, P.S. Chas, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶908

¶909

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶910

Indrawati Kumari, daughter of Ghamandi Paswan, resident of W/o Prasanjeet Kumar Paswan, P.O.-Oriya, P.S.-Hazaraibagh, District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand.

¶911

Manjeet Kumar Paswan, son of Lakhan Ram Paswan, resident of P.O.-Oreya, P.S. - Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh, Jharkhand.

¶912

Ashish Kumar Mandal, son of Satya Narayan Mandal, resident of Vill - Jaypur, P.O.- Barwadda, P.S. - Barwadda, District - Dhanbad.

¶913

Subhash Kumar, son of Sachidanand Singh, Resident of Vill.Mangrodih, P.O.-Dandidih, P.S.-Giridih (Muff), District - Giridih.

¶914

Rahul Dangi, son of Narendra Dangi, resident of Bajobar, P.O. - Nawadih, P.S. - Pathalgada, District - Chatra.

¶915

Sanjeev Kumar, son of Yamuna Kumar, resident of Gaira, P.O. Chuglamo, P.S. Deori, District -Giridih.

¶916

Md. Siddique Khan, son of Md. Samsul Hoda Khan, resident of H.No.-40, Tapkara Khas, Barda, P.O., P.S. & District-Khunti.

¶917

Sumit Kumar, son of Lilu Saw, resident of Vill - Kadma No. 2, P.O. - Kadma, P.S. - Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶918

Bikas Kumar, son of Yugal Kishor, resident of Vill.-Bhaluwahi, P.O.-Chiknadih, P.S. - Deori, District - Giridih.

¶919

Raj Roshan, son of Rajesh Saw, resident of Vill.Jagannathdih, P.O. - Mirzaganj, P.S. Jamua, District - Giridih.

¶920

Amar Kumar, son of Bal Krishan Prasad Mehta, resident of Nagwan, P.O., P.S. & District- Hazaribagh.

¶921

Dhirendra Yadav, son of Ramkishun Yadav, resident of Alagdiha, Maskedih, P.O. , P.S. & District - Hazaribagh.

¶922

Khagendra Kumar, son of Jodhan Prasad Yadav, resident of Vill.-Ghanghari, P.O.-Dharagulli, P.S. -Bagodar, District - Giridih.

¶923

Kailash Saw, son of Bhuneshwar Shaw, resident of Kharaun, P.O. , P.S. & District - Hazaribagh.

¶924

Priyanka Kumari, daughter of Rajesh Kumar Gupta, resident of Thana - Barhi, P.O. - Rasoia, P.S.-Dhamna, District - Hazaribagh.

¶925

Babulal Kumar, son of Nanhu Mahto, resident of Pagar, Chatti, Bariatu, Tandwa, P.O. & P.S. - Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶926

Pramod Kumar, son of Basudeo Saw, resident of Vill - Penk, P.O. Penk, P.S. Nawadih, District -Bokaro.

¶927

Shubham Kumar, son of Praveen Kumar Singh, resident of Vill.-Tetariadih, P.O. - Domchanch Bazar, P.S.-Koderma, District - Koderma.

¶928

Rahul Kumar Singh, son of Satendra Kumar Singh, resident of Vill Kandabar, P.O. - Ghanghari, P.S.-Huntarganj, District - Chatra.

¶929

Kapil Dew Kumar Mahto, son of Ramchandra Mahto, resident of Mundro, P.O., P.S. & District –Giridih.

¶930

Suraj Kumar Tiwari, son of Raghubir Tiwari, resident of 47, Dumbi, P.O.-Dumi, P.S. - Chatra, District-Chatra.

¶931

Tejlal Yadav, son of Nunulal Yadav, resident of Vill -

¶932

¶933

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶934

Ambatand, P.O. - Kuhrobindo, P.S. - Jamua, District - Giridih.

¶935

Sachin Kumar, son of Suresh Prasad Kushwaha, resident of P.S.-Katkamsaandi, P.O.-Lupung, P.S. - Kanchanpur, District - Hazaribagh.

¶936

Mithlesh Kumar Gupta, son of Bhuneshwar Saw, resident of 76A, Shaharjam, P.O., P.S. & District-Chatra.

¶937

Manish Kumar Soni, son of Vijay Prasad Soni, resident of P.O.+P.S.-Ichak, District-Hazaribagh.

¶938

Uttam Kumar, son of Jitendra Kumar, resident of Selari, P.O., P.S. & District - Koderma.

¶939

Mukesh Kumar Roy, son of Upendra Roy, resident of Salidih, P.O.-Tisri. P.S. & District - Giridih.

¶940

Shruti Rani Roy, daughter of Basant Ray, resident of Block - Dhanwar, P.O. - Kubri, District - Giridih.

¶941

Prantosh Kumar Singh, son of Digamber Singh, resident of Selhara Kala, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District -Hazaribagh.

¶942

Manoj Munda, son of Karma Munda, resident of 12, Sirka Near Primary School, P.O. & P.S. - Gola, District -Ramgarh.

¶943

Sitaram Kumar, son of Balo Saw, resident of Vill - Nawadih, P.O. & P.S.-Baraini, District - Giridih.

¶944

Ranjeet Nath Goswami, son of Indradev Nath Goswami, resident of Ward No. 03, Panchayat Murukmanai, P.O. & P.S. Markacho, District - Koderma.

¶945

Shubham Shekhar, son of Deonarayan Saw, resident of Vill.Jarwa, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District- Hazaribagh.

¶946

Santosh Kumar Paswan, son of Suresh Ram, resident of Vill - Pandeydih, P.O. - Sirsiya, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶947

Ranjeet Paswan, son of Naresh Ram, resident of Vill.Manjhiladih, P.O. - Dhoranji, P.S. - Dewari, District - Giridih.

¶948

Anup Kumar, son of Kedar Singh, resident of Kotwar Muhla, Ward No. 5, P.S. & P.O.- Markacho, District - Koderma.

¶949

Mithlesh Kumar Singh, son of Rajendra Singh, resident of Hazari Dhamna, Gauria Karma, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶950

Ashutosh Kumar, son of Sukhdeo Prasad, resident of Lakhe, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District- Hazaribagh.

¶951

Praveen Kumar, son of Baidyanath Yadav, resident of P.S.Dhanwar, P.O.-Karmatand, P.S.-Murna, District-Giridih.

¶952

Shubhendu Kumar Suman. son of Rajkumar Yadav, resident of P.S. - Deori, P.O. - Ghutia, P.S. -Kisgo, District - Giridih.

¶953

Sonu Modi, son of Ramdeo Modi, resident of Panchayat Navadih Black Sariya Gamv Choudharidih, P.O. - Sabalpur, P.S. - Sariya, District - Giridih.

¶954

Tikeshwar Kumar, son of Chhedi Saw, resident of Daru Kharika, P.O. & P.S. -Hazaribagh, District- Hazaribagh.

¶955

Sumit Kumar, son of Virendra Kumar Gupta, resident of Daru Kharika, P.O. & P.S. - Hazaribagh, District -Hazaribagh.

¶956

Pankaj Kumar, son of Rajkumar Das, resident of 96 Harizan Mohalla, Ward No. 20, P.O. - Jhumri Telaiya, P.S. & District - Koderma.

¶957

Shivam Kumar Verma, son of Arjun Pd Verma, resident of Vill.-Karihari, P.O.-Karihari, P.S.-Hirodih, District - Giridih.

¶958

¶959

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶960

Subham Kumar Bhaghat, son of Pradip Prasad Bhaghat, resident of Vill Khairbani, P.O.-Khaibani, P.S. & District - Dumka.

¶961

Vivek Kumar Pandey, son of Sukhdew Pandey, resident of Panchayat - South Doranda Dhanwar, Vill & P.O. - Sabladih, P.S.-Doranda, District - Giridih.

¶962

Sachin Kumar, son of Basant Safi, resident of Karmali Tola Near Shiv Mandir, Mandudih, P.O. & P.S.-Ramgarh, District - Ramgarh.

¶963

Vishal Kumar, son of Firangi Thakur, resident of Gargali, Manduchatti, P.O. & P.S.-Mandu, District Ramgarh.

¶964

Gango Kumar Yadav, son of Prabhu Yadav, resident of Kolgarma, P.O. & P.S.-Koderma, District- Koderma.

¶965

Kundan Soni, son of Raju Soni, resident of Gondha Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Jharpo, District - Hazaribagh.

¶966

Rajesh Kumar Yadav, son of Ramchandra Yadav, Resident of P.O.-Indarwa, P.S.-Koderma, P.O.-Jharitand, District-Koderma.

¶967

Dhaneshwar Mahto, son of Narayan Mahto, resident of H.No03, Shankardih Tola, Kodwadih, P.O. - Galagi, P.S. - Nimiyaghat and District - Giridih.

¶968

Birendra Kumar, son of Ruplal Prajapati, resident of Bharajo, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribag and District Hazaribagh.

¶969

Dharmendra Kumar Bhokta, son of Kauleshwar Singh Bhokta, resident of Vill- Bengokata, P.O.-Laralutubag, P.S.-Chatra and District - Chatra.

¶970

Dharmendra Kumar, son of Basdeo Mahto, resident of Panchayat Nawadih, Vill- Nawadih, Dumma, P.O. - Jamua, P.S. - Giridih and District - Giridih.

¶971

Jayshree Mandal, daughter of Pradip Kumar Mandal, resident of H.No- 23, Vill+P.O. - Sarsa, P.S. -Palajori and District - Deoghar.

¶972

Aryan Kumar, son of Digamber Modi, resident of 72, Station Road, Saria, Khurd, P.O. & P.S. -Giridih and District-Giridih.

¶973

Bhuneshwar Kumar, son of Jagdish Mahto, resident of Bagodar, Pashchimi Bagodar, Vill-Ambadih, P.O. - Dondlo, P.S. - Giridih and District - Giridih.

¶974

Subhash Kumar, son of Harihar Sahu, resident of P.O.Barkattha, P.S.-Kalhabar and District Hazaribagh.

¶975

Nitish Kumar, son of Dinanath Kumar, resident of Khoda Ahar, P.O. - Deochanda, P.S. - Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.

¶976

Saket Sethi, son of Late Bishwa Pati Sethi, resident of Nawabgunj, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District- Hazaribagh.

¶977

Manish Kumar Yadav, son of Hiralal Yadav, resident of Barano/ Banka, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, and DistrictHazaribagh.

¶978

Rambilas Yadav, son of Bhuneshwar Yadav, resident of Ward no-03, Gadgi, P.O.-Jainagar, P.S.-Parsabad and District - Koderma.

¶979

Sujeet Kumar, son of Santosh Modi, resident of Vill+P.O. - Ratabahiyar, P.S. - Gandey and District - Giridih.

¶980

Zafar Iqbal, son of Abdul Qaiyum, resident of Sakhiya, P.O. &

¶981

¶982

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶983

P.S.- Hazaribagh and District Hazaribagh.

¶984

Satyendra Kumar, son of Basudeo Saw, resident of VillLamta, P.O. Shivrajpur, VTC-Lamta, P.S.- Chatra and District - Chatra.

¶985

Shyam Kumar Verma, son of Tribhwan Mahto, resident of Chai Kalan, P.O. & P.S. - Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.

¶986

Kumari Nitu, daughter of Ishwar Dayal Gope, resident of Kanimundwar, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.

¶987

Ravi Kumar, son of Haricharan Rajak, resident of Haiga School Muhalla, Jori Kalan, P.O. & P.S. - Chatra and District Chatra.

¶988

Kumari Ritu, daughter of Ishwar Dayal Gope, resident of Kanimundwar, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.

¶989

Suman Kumar Thakur, son of Premlal Thakur, resident of Minus Type 2-330, Near Ganesh Mandir, Rajrappa Project, Sanri, P.O. & P.S.-Ramgarh, and District-Ramgarh.

¶990

Alok Ranjan Prabhat, son of Yogendra Kumar, resident of VillGardih, P.O. - Jantajaridih, P.S. - Birni, Arari, P.O. - Palounjai, P.S. - Giridih and District - Giridih.

¶991

Abhimanyu Mandal, son of Pachu Mandal, resident of VillChaundhibad, P.O. - Parsiya, P.S. -Suriya, Amnari, P.O. - Giridih and District - Giridih.

¶992

Pradeep Mahto, son of Kameshwar Mahto, resident of VillRola, P.O. - Maganpur, P.S. - Gola and District-Ramgarh.

¶993

Kundan Kumar, son of Arun Kumar Roy, resident of 75, Kolghatti, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District -Hazaribagh.

¶994

Sanjay Kumar Yadav, son of Ratan Gop, resident of Kolghatti, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, and District- Hazaribagh.

¶995

Bharat Kumar Singh, son of Byash Singh, resident of VillMangrodih, P.O. - Dandidih, P.S. - Giridih and District - Giridih.

¶996

Vikram Kumar Pandey, son of Ashok Kumar Pandey, resident of Vill- Mangrodih, P.O. & P.S.- Dandidih and District - Giridih.

¶997

Sandeep Kumar, son of Arjun Saw, resident of Vill- Saharjam, P.O.-Karni, P.S. - Itkhori and District Chatra.

¶998

Pradeep Kumar, son of Tukan Mahto, resident of Kutipisi, P.O.- Padma, O.P. Nawadih Kalan, P.S. - Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.

¶999

Deepak Kumar, son of Karu Saw, resident of Near Shiv Mandir, Bedhana Bara, Dadpur, P.S. & P.O-Chouparan and District - Hazaribagh.

¶1000

Prakash Prasad, son of Bhuneshwar Mahto, resident of P.O.Barkattha, P.S. - Pesra, Gangpacho and District - Hazaribagh.

¶1001

Shishir Prasad, son of Harihar Saw, resident of P.S. - Barkattha, P.O.-Kalhabar and District -Hazaribagh.

¶1002

Reetesh Kumar, son of Teknarayan Mahto, resident of P.S. Katkamsandi, P.O.-Lupung, Kanchanpur and District - Hazaribagh.

¶1003

Sagar Kumar Das, son of Sakendra Ram, resident of Vill-

¶1004

¶1005

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1006

Dhangada Rakshi, P.O. - Dhangada, P.S.- Tandwa and District - Chatra.

¶1007

Shubham Kumar, son of Gauri Prasad, resident of Bagra and P.O., P.S. & District - Chatra.

¶1008

Vijay Kumar Saw, son of Naresh Saw, resident of H.no- 39D, P.O. - Pobi, Vill- Pobi, P.S. - Jamua and District-Giridih.

¶1009

Nandkishor Paswan, son of Basdeo Paswan, resident of P.O.Bagodar, P.S. - Jarmunni, Sonturpi and District - Giridih.

¶1010

Shubham Sagar, son of Rajiv Mishra, resident of Akhara Chouk Chedra, Bishungarh, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.

¶1011

Suman Saurav, son of Tapeshwar Kumar, resident of Guru Chalti, Barkagaon P.O., P.S. and District - Hazaribagh.

¶1012

Satish Kumar Mishra, son of Ramkumar Mishra, resident of Bargadda, Bahimar P.O., P.S. & District Hazaribagh.

¶1013

Abhay Kumar Sinha, son of Lalan Prasad, resident of 514 B, Ram Nagar Path no. 8, P.S.-Sadar, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1014

Ranjan Kumar Sinha, son of Mithilesh Kumar Sinha, resident of Gali no-8, Near Ram Mandir, Ram Nagar, P.O. & P.S. - Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.

¶1015

Shailesh Kumar Choubey, son of Parmanand Choubey, resident of 622, P.O.-Kadma, P.S.-Katkamsandi and District - Hazaribagh.

¶1016

Pintu Kumar, son of Vishnudeo Sah, resident of Kadma, Hazaribagh and P.O., P.S. & District - Hazaribagh.

¶1017

Anil Kumar, son of Yugal Kishore Prasad, resident of Barka Kalan Ratanpur Ichak, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.

¶1018

Praveen Kumar Barnwal, son of Satyanarayan Barnwal, resident of Arkhango, Via Domchanch Bazar, P.O., P.S. & District - Giridih.

¶1019

Ajay Kumar Ram, son of Lakshmi Ram, resident of H.no-5 I, Nero, P.S. 284, Hirodih, P.O. & P.S.- Remba and District - Giridih.

¶1020

Ajeet Barnwal, son of Shaligram Modi, resident of P.S. - Rajdhanwar, Arkhango, P.O., P.S. & District - Giridih.

¶1021

Shashi Kumar Modi, son of Late Shankar Modi, resident of Vill- Jaridih, P.O.-Janta, P.S.- Birni and District - Giridih.

¶1022

Ajay Yadav, son of Subhash Yadav, Pathaldiha, P.S. Koderma, resident of Ward no-1, P.O.-Garhai, Kodarma and District - Koderma.

¶1023

Jenet Kerketta, daughter of Bhadwa Kerketta, resident of Kamdara, Bamhandih, P.O. - Gumla, P.S. - Gumla, District - Gumla.

¶1024

Bikash Kumar Sharma, son of Dashrath Prasad Sharma, resident of 103, Shastri Nagar, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. - Giridih, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.

¶1025

Rahul Kumar Chandrawanshi, son of Anil Chandrawanshi, resident of Hazaribagh Road Barhi, P.O. Barhi, P.S. - Barhi, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1026

Dhiraj Kumar, son of Ramchandra Ram, resident of Bonga,

¶1027

¶1028

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1029

Berdhna, P.O. - Berdhna, P.S. - Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1030

Abhinandan Kumar Dangi, son of Ram Bachan Deo Dangi, resident of Vill – Dhodhi, P.O.-Mandhaniya, P.S.-Itkhori, District-Chatra.

¶1031

Deepak Kumar, son of Nandlal Mahto, resident of Badaka, Chumba, Uchringa Tola, P.O. - Giddi, P.S. - Giddi, District - Ramgarh.

¶1032

Anil Kumar Shaw, son of Karoo Shaw, resident of Ward No. 13, Vill-Kanjhiyadih, Panchayat-Dandadih, P.O. - Jainagar, P.S. - Jainagar, District - Koderma.

¶1033

Vikash Kumar, son of Rama Mahato, resident of Ward No. 5, P.O. - Markachcho, P.S. - Markachcho, District - Koderma.

¶1034

Jyotindra Kumar, son of Dilip Singh, resident of Panchayat - Pobi, Block - Jamua, Vill-Sandih, P.O. - Mirzaganj, P.S. - Jamua, District - Giridih.

¶1035

Sweta Kumari, daughter of Horil Kumar, resident of 57, Chhotki Pona Koyri Tika, near Vishwkarma Chauk, P.O. - Barki Pona, P.S. - Rajrappa, District - Ramgarh.

¶1036

Ramesh Kumar Mahto, son of Hari Mahto, resident of Tunda, P.O.-Pandu, P.S.-Pandu, District -Hazaribagh.

¶1037

Kundan Kumar Bakshi, son of Umesh Prasad Bakshi, resident of 544, Okni, Adarsh Puri, P.O.-Hazaribagh, P.S. - Sadar Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1038

Vinnet Kumar, son of Satendra Singh, resident of Vill-Ghujji, P.O.-Yadav Nagar, P.S. - Tanrwa, District - Chatra.

¶1039

Bahadur Saw, son of Bandhan Saw resident of Gram - Bekobar, P.O. - Bekobar, P.S. - Koderma, District - Koderma.

¶1040

Davendra Kumar Saw, son of Munshi Saw, resident of Kolgarma, P.O. - Koderma, P.S. - Koderma, District - Koderma.

¶1041

Gupta Mayakumari Birendrakumar, daughter of Birendra Kumar Gupta, resident of C/o Rajshekhar Kumar, Vill - Bekobar, P.S. & P.O.-Koderma, District -Koderma.

¶1042

Ramswrup Ram, son of Kishun Ram, resident of P.O. - Rampur, Petula, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District -Hazaribagh.

¶1043

Shakuntala Kumari, daughter of Late Nageshwar Saw, resident of Street Amgawan, P.O. - Shila, P.S. Simariya, VTC - Amgawan, District - Chatra.

¶1044

Agraj Kumar, son of Mahavir Yadav, resident of 50, Gaushala Road, Beside Talab, Ward 25, Jhumri Tilaiya, P.O.-Jhumri Tilaiya, P.S.-Koderma, District Koderma.

¶1045

Sitara Kumari, daughter of Koushal Kumar Mehta, resident of Gunja, P.O.-Gunja, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.

¶1046

Pallawi Kumari, daughter of Ranvijay Prasad Mehta, resident of Gunja, P.O.-Gunja, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.

¶1047

Laxmi Kumari, daughter of Arun Kumar Mehta, resident of P.O. Barhi, P.S.- Kadwa, District Hazaribagh.

¶1048

Manoj Kumar, son of Kameshwar Yadav, resident of Berokala, Barkatha, P.O.-Barkatha, P.S.-Barkatha, DistrictHazaribagh.

¶1049

Bikash Kumar, son of Puran Mahto, resident of Manjhli Dari,

¶1050

¶1051

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1052

Chepa Kalan, P.O. Chepa Kalan, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1053

Ramashish Kushwaha, son of Khirodhar Mahto, resident of Harli, P.O.-Harli, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1054

Rahul Kumar Gupta, son of Anil Kumar Gupta, resident of Hazaribagh Road, Near Kali Mandir, Barkagaon, P.Ο.Barkagaon, P.S. Barkagaon, District- Hazaribagh

¶1055

Sadanand Kumar, son of Rajkumar Rana, resident of VillPurnabarhan, P.O.-Chatro, P.S.- Deori, District - Giridih.

¶1056

Shubhum Kumar Pandey, son of Shashibhushan Pandey, resident of P.S.-Gorhar, Belkapi, P.O. - Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1057

Vimal Kumar Mahto, son of Pritlal Mahto, resident of VillHosir, P.O.-Dari, P.S. Giddi-A, Kanki, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1058

Vijay Kumar Gupta, son of Raj Harish Gupta, resident of Jabra Road Korrah Muhalla, P.O. - Korrah, P.S.-Sadar, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1059

Shivani Kumari, daughter of Om Prakash Gupta, resident of Ward No. 06, Panchayat Jamu, P.S. & P.O.-Markacho, District - Koderma.

¶1060

Prakash Kumar, son of Bandhan Saw, resident of P.O.Bekobar, P.S.-Koderma, District- Koderma.

¶1061

Krishna Oraon, son of Birsa Oraon, resident of Vill - Lbed, P.O.-Tiril Ashram, Dhurwa, P.S. -Dhurwa, District - Ranchi.

¶1062

Sanoj Kumar Munda, son of Laxman Munda, resident of Manatu, Ormanjhi, P.O. - Ormanjhi, P.S. -Ormanjhi, District - Ranchi.

¶1063

Rajshekhar Kumar, son of Ramsahay Saw, resident of P.O.Bekobar, P.S. Koderma, District-Koderma.

¶1064

Bikash Kumar, son of Chandrika Prasad, resident of Ward No. 06, Panchayat Jamu, P.S. - Markacho, P.O. & District - Koderma.

¶1065

Gautam Keshri, son of Jugal Prasad Keshri, resident of 343, Kumar Toli Chowk, Near Devi Mandap, P.O.-Boddom Bazar, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.

¶1066

Sanjay Kumar, aged about 28 years, son of Sahdeo Saw, resident of 122, Jugra, Barkagaon, Chepa Kalan, P.O. Barkagaon, P.S. - Barkagaon, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1067

Shishupal Kumar, son of Bhuwneshwar Dangi, resident of Gidhaur, P.O.-Gidhaur, P.S.-Chatra, District - Chatra.

¶1068

Mantu Kumar Mehta, son of Mahesh Mehta, resident of PostRatanpur Fufundi, Panchayat Dadhighaghar, P.O.-Ratanpur, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.

¶1069

Raju Rana, son of Bhuneshwar Rana, resident of Vill-Peltoul Khurd, P.O.-Peltoul Kala, P.S.-Rajpur, District - Chatra.

¶1070

Sudeep Kumar, son of Nakul Prasad Mehta, resident of Ratanpur, near Hanuman Mandir, Barka Khurd, P.O.-Barka Khurd, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.

¶1071

Ravi Ranjan, son of Kailash Prasad, resident of Flat No. 105, Block B, Bokaro Steel Officers Housing Co-op. Society Ltd. Jain Hospital Sector 8/C, Ranopokhar, P.O. - Baidhmara, P.S. - Bokaro Steel City, District - Bokaro.

¶1072

¶1073

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1074

Satyanarayan Kumar, son of Arjun Prasad Kushwaha, resident of P.S. - Ichak, P.O. - Bariyath, P.S. - Sirsi, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1075

Birendra Rana, son of Arjun Rana, resident of Gram - Bundu, P.O. - Dadighaghr, P.S. - Padma OP, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1076

Jitendra Kumar, son of Shankar Mistri, resident of Guriya, Partappur, P.O. - Partappur, P.S. - Chatra, District Chatra.

¶1077

Rimpal Kumari, daughter of Nand Kishor Prasad, resident of Babhne, Pratappur, P.O. Pratappur, P.S. - Chatra, District - Chatra.

¶1078

Anand Charles Minz, son of Paulus Minz, resident of Near Palloti Church Tati, Dumar Toil, P.O. - Kuru, P.S.-Kuru Tati, District - Lohardaga.

¶1079

Karan Kumar, son of Durga Charan Mishra, resident of P.O.Pupunki Ashram, P.S. - Chas Mu, District Bokaro.

¶1080

Laxmi Kumari, daughter of Tun Tun Ram, resident of House No. 285, Church Road, Chandrapura, New Basti, Pipradih Church Road, P.O.-Chandrapura, P.S.-Bokaro, District-Bokaro.

¶1081

Mamta Kumari, daughter of Tuntun Ram, resident of House no 285, Church Road, Chandrapura, New Basti, Pipradih Church Road, Bokaro, P.O.-Bokaro, P.S.-Bokaro, DistrictBokaro.

¶1082

Ramesh Kumar Singh, son of Ramdhir Singh, resident of VillOkaraha, P.O.-Chhattarpur, P.S.-Chhattarpur, District - Palamu.

¶1083

Rinku Kumari, daughter of Nemchand Modi, resident of C/O Rajesh Kumar, Marwari muhalla, Chatra, P.O.-Chatra, P.S. Chatra, District - Chatra.

¶1084

Ravish Chandra, son of Girindra Prasad Gupta, resident of Purana Petrol Pump, P.S. & P.O. - Chatra, District -Chatra.

¶1085

Ritesh Kumar Gupta, son of Gopal Prasad Gupta, resident of Near Hyundai Showroom, Harmu Road, Kishor Ganj, Ranchi G.P.O., P.O.-Ranchi, P.S.-Ranchi, District-Ranchi.

¶1086

Minakshi Bera, daughter of Sachinandan Bera, resident of Vill- Bankdaha, Tola - Nutandihi Guhiyapal, P.O., P.S. & District - East Singhbhum.

¶1087

Sandeep Kumar Munda, son of Seken Munda, resident of Jui Road, Pramothnagar, Parsudih, P.O. Tatanagar, P.S. - Parsudih, District - Purbi Singhbhum.

¶1088

Subhjeeet Munda, son of Seken Munda, resident of Pramothnagar, Parsudih, Sidhu Kanhu Chowk, P.O. - Tatanagar, P.S. - Parsudih, District - Purbi Singhbhum.

¶1089

Amit Mandal, son of Jagdish Prasad Mandal, resident of Gangudih, Pundidah, P.O., P.S. & District Seraikela Kharsawan.

¶1090

Ramanuj Kumar, son of Vijay Kumar Singh, resident of VillRamnagar, P.O. Kadma, P.S.-Hazaribag, District - Hazaribag.

¶1091

Prakash Deogam, son of Rajesh Singh Deogam, resident of Vill- Domardiha, P.O.-Barkundia, P.S.-Muffasil, District - Chaibasa.

¶1092

Laxmi Biruly, daughter of Chemeya Biruly, W/O Thakur Singh Purty, resident of P.O. - Tutugutu, P.S.-Thinkpani, District -

¶1093

¶1094

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1095

Pashchimi Singhbhum.

¶1096

1. Sunita Kumari Soy, daughter of Budhan Lal Soy, resident of 117, Kuchai, P.O. & P.S.-Kuchai, District-Saraikela Kharsawan.

¶1097

Neelwanti Deogam, daughter of Prem Chand Deogam, resident of P.O.-Barkundia, P.S. - Muffasil, District Chaibasa.

¶1098

Rajesh Kumar, son of Arjun Bakshi, resident of C-3 Vatika Green City, Dimna Road, Mango, P.O. -Mango, P.S.-Mango, District - East Singhbhum.

¶1099

Bikash Mahato, son of Arun Chandra Mahato, resident of P.O. & P.S.-Janum, Karargama, Shirum, District -Seraikela Kharsawan.

¶1100

Kumar Praveen Sao, son of Sushil Chandra Gope, resident of P.O.-Chitimiti, P.S.-Manjhari, District -West Singhbhum.

¶1101

Jayhind Kumar, son of Subodh Kumar, resident of VillPokhariya, P.O.- Kenduwa. P.S. -Hansadih, District-Dumka.

¶1102

Harendra Kumar Singh, son of Arun Kumar Singh, resident of Gram Jori, Near Pratapur More, Panchayat-Jori Kala, P.O. - & P.S.-Jori Kala, District - Chatra.

¶1103

Amit Kumar Singh, son of Asheshwar Kumar Singh, resident of 114, Chankayapuri, Mango, P.O.-Mango, P.S. - Mango, District - East Singhbhum.

¶1104

Jaya Kumari, daughter of Braj Kishor Singh, resident of W/O - Rajnish Kishor Singh, Q. No. C.C 34, Champia Colony, Sidhgoar, P.O.Agrico, P.S. -Sidhgoar, District East Singhbhum.

¶1105

Harish Kumar Mahto, son of Ajambar Mahto, resident of H.No 18, Pitaidih, Chirudih, P.O., P.S. & District Ranchi.

¶1106

Reema Mahato, daughter of Madhusudan Mahato, resident of Sai Nagar Station Road, Bada Gamahria, P.O. SeraikelaKharsawan, P.S. Seraikela, District - Seraikela-Kharsawan.

¶1107

Nishat Bajpai, son of Umesh Kumar Bajpai, resident of Q. NoL2/11, Kulshi Road, P.O. - Sakchi, P.S. - Bistupur, District - East Singhbhum.

¶1108

Dhanu Hembrom, son of Soleshwar Hembrom, resident of P.O.-Kathbhari, P.S.-Manjhari, District - Pashchimi Singhbhum.

¶1109

Balram Kawat, son of Chitrasen Kawat, resident of Panchayat - Buridih, P.S. - Kharswan, P.O. - Deoli, District - SeraikelaKharsawan.

¶1110

Ashish Gupta, son of Pradeep Kumar Gupta, resident of Private House, Muni Ashram, Main Road, Manoharpur, P.O. & P.S.- Manoharpur, District - West Singhbhum.

¶1111

Arjun Sharma, son of Kamlesh Sharma, resident of 41, Pandit Hata, Ward 09, near Shiv Mandir, P.S. & P.O.-Chakradharpur, District-Pashchimi Singhbhum.

¶1112

Shankar Majhi, son of Sohrai Majhi, resident of PanchayatDumra, P.O. & P.S.-Kandra, Mahtabeda, District - SeraikelaKharsawan.

¶1113

Avinash Kumar, son of Keshaw Chandra Verma, resident of S/28/9, S-type, Near Housing Colony P.S.-Adityapur, P.O. - Adityapur, District - Seraikela-Kharsawan.

¶1114

Suraj Deogam, son of Moika Deogam, resident of P.O.Barkundia, P.S.-Muffasil, P.O.-Chaibasa, District - Pashchimi

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

Singhbhum.

Gautam Pal, son of Ram Binay Pal, resident of P.O.-Kabra Khurd, P.S.-Haidarnagar, District - Palamu.

¶1119

Jaya Ashraf, son of Md Nasim Uddin, resident of Vill Rewat Kala, P.O. Matlong, P.S. Manika, District - Latehar.

¶1120

Sandeep Kumar Mehta, son of Taleshwar Prasad Mehta, resident of VTC - Darha, P.O. & P.S.– Ichak, District - Hazaribagh.

¶1121

Arjun Verma, son of Bhudeo Verma, resident of P.O. Pahariya, Gram Ratura, Panchayat Pahariya, P.S. & District - Deoghar.

¶1122

Bhavesh Das, son of Sudhir Das, resident of Pathraul, P.O. & P.S. - Pathrol, District - Deoghar.

¶1123

Prakash Das, son of Gardi Das, resident of Ward No-18, Chittlodhiya, P.O., P.S. & District - Deoghar.

¶1124

Vinay Kumar Choudhary, son of Ramkishor Choudhary, resident of Vill- Kajra, P.O. - Bagjora, P.S. Madhupur, District - Deoghar.

¶1125

Amit Raj, son of Binod Kumar Prasad, resident of VillLakhoriya, P.O.-Lakhoriya, P.S.-Sarwan, District - Deoghar.

¶1126

Dashrath Ray, son of Pradhan Prasad Ray, resident of Bhurkunda, Lakhoriya, Sarwan, P.O. - Sarwan, P.S.-Deoghar, District - Deoghar.

¶1127

Bambam Kumar, son of Ashok Kumar Mandal, resident of VillTilona, P.O.-Sahara, P.S. - Taljhari, District-Dumka.

¶1128

Sarafat Hussain, son of Mubarak Hussain, resident of Vill.Ghaghi, P.O.-Jasidih, P.S.-Jasidih, District-Deoghar.

¶1129

Md. Sadakat Hussain, son of Md. Mubarak Hussain, resident of Ghaghi, Jasidih, Tobha Ghat, P.O., P.S. & District-Deoghar.

¶1130

Md. Afroj Ansari, son of Md. Samsuddin Ansari, resident of Vill-Tabhaghat, P.O. - Jasidih, P.S. - Jasidih, District - Deoghar.

¶1131

Swarup Kumar Chandra, son of Diwakar Chandra, resident of Vill- Rampur, P.O. & P.S. - Siktiya, District Dumka.

¶1132

Sitaram Rana, son of Sahadeo Rana, resident of H. No- 09, Ward No-07, Kanki, Masanjor, P.O. & P.S.-Jamtara, District - Deoghar.

¶1133

Abhishek Niraj, son of Jaykant Kumar Ray, resident of Vill.Pathariya, P.O. & P.S.-Punasi, District-Deoghar.

¶1134

Pradip Kumar Yadav, son of Yogendra Yadav, resident of VillJamro, P.O.-Jhalar, P.S. - Mohanpur, District - Deoghar.

¶1135

Dheeraj Kumar Ray, son of Himanshu Prasad Ray, resident of Vill.-Khawashdih, P.O.-Ghorlash, Rohan, P.S.-Jasidih, VTCKhawasdih, District-Deoghar.

¶1136

Ajay Kumar Singh, son of Bipin Singh, resident of Mahatowa, Jarkahi, Ojhadih, P.O. - Ojhadih, P.S. -Deoghar, District - Deoghar.

¶1137

Sanjay Kumar Rajwar, son of Harendra Rajwar, resident of Galgaltand P.O., P.S. & District - Bokaro.

¶1138

Amit Kumar Gope, son of Gaur Chandra Gope, resident of 111-upper tola Bansgari, P.O- Galgaltand, P.S-Chandankiyari, District - Bokaro.

¶1139

Kuber Hazra, son of Abani Bhushan Hazra, resident of 76

¶1140

¶1141

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1142

Chitahitand, P.O Alkusha, P.S.-Chasmu & District-Bokaro.

¶1143

Mitan Kumar Choubey, son of Balaram Choubey, resident of P.O - Alkusha, P.S - Chasmu, & District -Bokaro.

¶1144

Ankit Kumar, son of Surendra Ram, resident of Sangbariya, P.O., P.S. & District - Garhwa.

¶1145

Md. Qamruzaman Ansari, son of Md. Ibrar Ansari, resident of New Azad Nagar, Bhuli, P.O., P.S. & District - Dhanbad.

¶1146

Dhanoj Kumar Rajwar, son of Manu Rajwar, resident of Vill - Matari, Nichitpur, P.O., P.S. & District - Bokaro.

¶1147

Sumit Kumar Prajapati, son of Ghanshyam Prajapati, residence of 265/A, pandra road, Near Hat Bazar, P.O., P.S. & District - Seraikela Kharsawan.

¶1148

Vikash Kumar, son of Nandlal Modi, residence of Gawan, P.O., P.S. & District - Giridih.

¶1149

Amlesh Kumar Ravi, son of Shayamlal Ram, resident of VillPotma, P.O., P.S. & District - Giridih.

¶1150

Goutam Kumar Das, Son of Kailash Das, resident of VillHussainabad, P.O. - Deoghar, P.S. - Deoghar, District – Deoghar.

¶1151

… … Petitioners Versus

¶1152

The State of Jharkhand

¶1153

The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶1154

The Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi through its Chairman

¶1155

The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi

¶1156

The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi

¶1157

The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶1158

…. … Respondents

¶1159

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶1160

---

¶1161

For the Petitioners	: Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate Ms. Aprajita Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. Akash Ajit Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Advocate Ms. Satakchhi Priya Verma, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Abhi, Advocate
For the State-Respondent	: Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate General Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C. to A.G.
For the Intervenors	: Mr. Gopal Shankarnarayan Sr. Advocate Ms. V. Mohana, Sr. Advocate Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Amritansh Vats, Advocate Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate

¶1162

¶1163

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1164

Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate Ms. Neha Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. Rishav Kumar, Advocate Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate Mr. Bhawesh Kumar Tiwary, Advocate Mr. Ram Subhag Singh, Advocate Mr. Raj Vardhan, Advocate Ms. Archana Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent-JSSC : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate ---

¶1165

Reserved on 03.11.2025 Pronounced on : 03. 12.2025 Per : Rajesh Shankar, J. :

¶1166

W.P. (PIL) No. 5717 of 2024 has been preferred for the

¶1167

following reliefs: -

¶1168

(i) for conducting proper investigation/enquiry through a court monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) or through an independent central agency into the serious incident of paper leak having repeatedly taken place in the examination of Jharkhand General Graduate Level Combined Competitive Examination i.e. JGGLCCE-2023 (Regular) (hereinafter to be referred as “the said examination”) held on 21/22.09.2024 conducted by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission (JSSC) for recruitment of 2021 persons on various posts which has resulted in great turmoil and resentment amongst about more than 3 lakh candidates who have appeared in the said examination but have got prejudiced due to paper leak.

¶1169

(ii) for issuance of direction upon the respondents not

¶1170

to publish the final result of the said examination as

¶1171

¶1172

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1173

well as not to issue offers of appointment unless and until the investigation/enquiry into the matter of paper leak is completed.

¶1174

(iii) for commanding upon the respondents to frame and implement a full proof mechanism so as to ensure fairness in the competitive examinations in the State.

¶1175

2. W.P.(S) No. 1476 of 2025 has been preferred for the following reliefs: -

¶1176

(i) for quashing the Advertisement Nos. 10/2023 & 11/2023 floated by the JSSC to conduct Jharkhand General Graduate Level Combined Competitive Examination for the reason that the integrity of the said examination has been compromised as the questions related to the said examination were leaked much before the commencement of the said examination.

¶1177

(ii) for quashing the Notification No. 28, dated 04.12.2024 issued by the JSSC whereby the roll numbers of the successful candidates have been published and they have been called to appear for documents verification.

¶1178

(iii) for issuance of an appropriate direction to get the entire recruitment process investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.) which has been initiated pursuant to the publication of Advertisement

¶1179

¶1180

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1181

Nos. 10/2023 & 11/2023 floated by the JSSC.

¶1182

3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024 is being taken as a lead case to decide

¶1183

the present batch of writ petitions.

¶1184

Submissions advanced by Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners

¶1185

4. Learned senior counsel contends that the petitioners of this Public Interest Litigation are teachers attached with different coaching institutes of Ranchi having sufficient source of income. They are quite concerned with the well-being of a large number of young students along with their parents who are highly disappointed due to repeated incidents of paper leak having taken place in the State competitive examinations. The petitioners have the concern that most of the students belong to marginalized and poor families and they cannot stand at par with the privileged ones who are playing with the system to fetch government jobs by any means leaving no hope for them.

¶1186

5. The petitioners have no vested private interest and they are taking up this matter just in public interest as a large number of aspirants/candidates have appeared in the said examination and most of them come from poor/marginalized families having difficulties and financial constraints in approaching this Hon'ble Court by way of filing individual writ petitions.

¶1187

6. The JSSC floated an advertisement being Advertisement No. 10/2023 pertaining to JGGLCCE-2023 (Regular) inviting on-line applications for the posts of Assistant Section Officer, Junior Secretariat Assistant, Labour Enforcement Officer, Planning

¶1188

¶1189

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1190

Assistant, Block Welfare Officer, Block Supply Officer, Circle Inspector-cum-Kanungo in which approximately 6,40,000 candidates applied.

¶1191

7. The JSSC also floated another advertisement being Advertisement No. 11 of 2023 pertaining to JGGLCCE-2023 (Backlog) inviting on-line applications against the sanctioned vacancies for the post of Junior Secretariat Assistant (reserved category). It was mentioned in the said advertisement that for both the aforesaid advertisements, only one examination would be conducted i.e., ‘Jharkhand General Graduate Level Combined Competitive Examination-2023 (regular & backlog).’

¶1192

8. Initially, the JSSC fixed the date for conducting the said examination on 28.01.2024 and 04.02.2024, however the said examination was cancelled due to paper leak. The JSSC again notified the dates for the said examination to be conducted on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 and on the said dates, the Mobile Internet, Mobile Data and Mobile Wi-Fi services of all mobile service providers were shut down in the entire State of Jharkhand vide order dated 20.09.2024 issued under the signature of the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management, Government of Jharkhand (the respondent no. 6).

¶1193

9. On 22.09.2024, prior to the commencement of examination in the first shift, various candidates who were also appearing at the said competitive examination, came across such instances which clearly suggested that a good number of cocandidates were already having access to the questions going to

¶1194

¶1195

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1196

be asked in the examination and were also in possession of the answers to those questions.

¶1197

10. Several candidates had reported the instances of paper leak to the JSSC as well as the police authorities, some of which are as follows: -

¶1198

(i) At Baliyapur examination centre, one Ramchandra mandal had seen a person, possibly a candidate, who was talking to someone else on his mobile phone and was noting down the answers on a piece of paper. He took picture of the paper by his mobile phone and after examination, he found that the same were the answers of the questions asked in the examination centre.

¶1199

(ii) At Kumar B. Ed College, Dhanbad, one Prem Lal Thakur had seen a co-candidate noting down something on his notebook while talking to someone on his mobile phone and when he approached the cocandidate, he tore the paper. Prem Lal Thakur’s friend, who was riding the bike, video graphed the incident and they kept the torn paper. After examination they re-arranged the torn paper and found that the same were answers to the questions asked in the examination paper.

¶1200

(iii) At Makhmandro Centre, Ratu, Ranchi, one Ashish Kumar had seen a co-candidate talking to someone on mobile phone and noting down something on a

¶1201

¶1202

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1203

piece of paper. Ashish had also noted down the said answers on a newspaper and after the examination he found that the same were answers of the questions asked in the examination.

¶1204

(iv) One Upendra Raut, who was going to his examination centre, had noticed that a co-candidate was engaged in a conversation with someone and was noting down answers on a note pad. He copied what was being written by the said co-candidate in a separate paper and took a picture of the paper by his mobile phone. After the examination, he found that the same were the answers of the question paper of the examination.

¶1205

(v) One student of Exam Fighter Coaching Centre had informed that five students had gone to Bihar for memorizing the question paper.

¶1206

(vi) One Anil Kumar was travelling in a train from Patna to Dhanbad. He found that 2 co-passengers were discussing some questions which he noted down and forwarded to his alternate Whatsapp number. After examination, he found that the same were similar to the questions asked in the examination.

¶1207

(vii) One Santosh Mastana had received a phone call from his student Deepika who had dictated some questions to him which were subsequently asked in the examination.

¶1208

¶1209

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1210

(viii) On 21.09.2024, one Gopi Krishna Yadav had received two images from Alok Krishna on Telegram App containing some answers. After examination, he found that the answers shared to him were the answers of the questions asked in the examination.

¶1211

11. All the aforesaid incidents are supported by photographs and videos which clearly indicate that the questions in relation to the said examination were leaked much prior to the commencement of the examination and the same were known to few candidates as a result of which they got unfair advantage over the other candidates.

¶1212

12. The incidents of paper leak were well known to some candidates before the commencement of the said examination, however they could not inform the same to the state authorities due to shut down of internet service in the entire State of Jharkhand.

¶1213

13. Apart from the paper leak, there had also been widespread cheating in the said examination committed by few candidates engaging someone else to appear in the examination on their behalf with a view to score better marks. One of such incidents occurred in Ramgarh district.

¶1214

14. There have been incidents of paper leak in other competitive examinations conducted in the recent past which clearly suggest that the State of Jharkhand has been the epicenter of paper leak and thus the same needs intervention of this Hon'ble Court so as to avoid such incidents and to ensure sanctity and

¶1215

¶1216

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1217

purity of the competitive examinations.

¶1218

15. In addition to the direct incidents of paper leakage at the examination centers, it also came to light during conversation with the large number of students/candidates who had gathered outside the JSSC office on 26.09.2024 to protest and raise voice against compromised integrity of the said examination, that the occurrence of question papers and answers leak at various locations had taken place two to three days prior to holding the examination, some of which had happened in a hotel at Asansol (West Bengal) and in a marriage hall at Niyamatpur (West Bengal). Similar instances of assembling few candidates for the purpose of sharing the leaked questions and their answers reportedly took place at Muzaffarpur (Bihar), Ranchi, Mandu, Delhi and Kathmandu (Nepal) where selected groups of candidates were prepped for the said examination.

¶1219

16. Numerous questions in the said examination were found copied from the SSC Combined Graduate Level Examinations held in 2019 and 2022. The said information was given to few candidates which shows that the questions were deliberately leaked to give advantage to specific candidates in order to allow them to prepare in advance for securing higher marks than other candidates.

¶1220

17. A group of students represented all the responsible authorities including His Excellency, The Governor of Jharkhand who, in turn, issued written direction to the state government and JSSC for taking needful actions but no final decision was taken by

¶1221

¶1222

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1223

the JSSC, rather its authorities were in utter haste to publish the result and offer appointments to all 2021 candidates who were in advantageous position than the common candidates.

¶1224

18. Despite these serious allegations and evidences provided by several students, including photographs and videos, no First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by JSSC with regard to paper leak which indicates that the JSSC is deliberately attempting to suppress the matter and to proceed announcing the results so as to facilitate the appointment of pre-selected candidates.

¶1225

19. One of the teachers namely Rajesh Prasad had lodged an online complaint under the provision of Section 173(1) of the ‘Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023’ on 29.09.2024, however, under undue influence of some unknown “high-ups”, the police did not permit him to put his signature on the said complaint as required to be done under Section 173 (1)(ii) of the BNSS, 2023. Thus, the police did not register his FIR and the officials were reluctant to proceed in the matter so as to safeguard the paper leakers/conspirators.

¶1226

20. Moreover, shutdown of internet services during the said examination was intended to prevent similar reports reaching the JSSC before commencement of the examination ensuring that paper leak could be facilitated through mobile phones without interruption and people would remain under impression that everything was going on in a fair and transparent manner. 21. There was a well-coordinated conspiracy involving JSSC officials, staff, certain agencies, and high-ranking government

¶1227

¶1228

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1229

officials in facilitating question paper leak and various unfair means of cheating to the favoured individuals helping them to score higher marks in the said competitive examination.

¶1230

22. The ultimate objective of this conspiracy is to facilitate appointments of those favoured individuals on the government positions by providing them leaked examination materials, thereby undermining fairness and integrity of the examination process. These acts do not only violate the basic principle of fairness in a competitive examination but also breach the trust and expectation of several aspiring candidates and the public at large.

¶1231

23. The conduct of the JSSC has been questionable. Most of the examinations held by it have been in controversy as on several occasions, either the questions papers have been leaked or the merit lists have not been published or the entire examination conducted by it has been cancelled due to irregularity. Moreover, the role of JSSC has always been under scanner for repeatedly committing irregularities in conducting competitive examinations ultimately hampering the career of the appearing candidates.

¶1232

24. A large number of candidates appearing in the competitive examinations come from poor/marginalized backgrounds. They can only express pain before their teachers like the petitioners who provide them courage, guidance and training to prepare for the competitive examinations, but in the present situation, when thousands of students/candidates of the State of Jharkhand are puzzled and perturbed, the petitioners have been advised to espouse their cause who want fair, transparent and

¶1233

¶1234

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1235

corruption/manipulation free conduct of competitive examinations. 25. The repeated malpractices and irregularities in the competitive examinations conducted by the JSSC have led to a significant loss of faith among the aspiring candidates and the general public. The state machinery which is entrusted with the solemn duty of conducting fair and transparent examinations, has miserably failed in it resulting in distrust among the aspirants.

¶1236

26. The examination process has prima facie been marred by blatant illegalities. These malpractices violate the right of the candidates to avail fair opportunities in view of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Moreover, these inflict irreparable damage to the candidates’ future prospects as repeated cancellations and reconduct of examinations create uncertainty and stress.

¶1237

27. Many candidates appeared in the said examination across the country travelling great distances to participate. However, due to the irregularities, their efforts rendered futile causing severe psychological and financial harm to them. This is evidenced by the fact that out of 3.19 lakh candidates scheduled to appear on the first day of the examination held on 21.09.2024, only 35-40% appeared. Moreover, on the second day i.e., 22.09.2024, the attendance also fell to a mere 42.49%. This decline in participation of candidates is a clear indicator of erosion of faith in the examination process managed by the JSSC.

¶1238

28. The mismanagement in the examination process denies a fair chance to the candidates to compete and succeed on merit. Repeated failure of the JSSC in conducting fair examinations has

¶1239

¶1240

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1241

caused irreparable harm to the aspirations of thousands of students who have dedicated many years in preparing for competitive exams and they only seek fairness and transparency.

¶1242

29. The JSSC has consistently failed to publish final merit lists after conducting various competitive examinations in which it has only disclosed the results undermining the fundamental principles of transparency and accountability, both being essential in public employment. Moreover, every public functionary must act fairly, objectively and with maximum transparency in order to meet the spirit of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India which requires the selection process in public employment to be flawless, open and objective, thereby providing equal opportunity to all aspiring candidates. However, non-publication of the merit lists with respect to various competitive examinations conducted by the JSSC suggests its malafide intent, arbitrary conduct and thus, violates candidates' right to information. Such action breaches the principle of equality enshrined in the Constitution rendering entire selection process invalid.

¶1243

Argument on behalf of the State

¶1244

30. Learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State makes the following argument: -

¶1245

31. The nature and purpose of filing the present PIL is malicious in order to gain popularity and to stall the appointment process of successful candidates.

¶1246

32. In compliance of the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by this Court, FIRs being CID Ranchi P.S. Case Nos. 01/2025 and

¶1247

¶1248

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1249

02/2025 dated 01.01.2025 and 03.01.2025 for the offences under Sections 316(2)/318(2)/318(4)/61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 12(2)/12(3) of the Jharkhand Competitive Examinations (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023 respectively were registered and in view of seriousness of the matter, an officer of the rank of Superintendent of Police was appointed as the investigating officer in the said cases.

¶1250

33. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was also constituted vide Memo No. 776/NGO dated 20.08.2025 comprising of Shri Anoop Birtharay, Inspector General of Police (STF), Jharkhand Jaguar, Ranchi as chairperson and Shri Y.S. Ramesh, DIG, S.C.R.B. Jharkhand, Ranchi and Shri Chandan Kumar Jha, DIG, CID as members.

¶1251

34. The SIT inquired into all the allegations in detail relating to incident of question paper leak of JGGLCCE- 2023 as levelled in the complaint of the petitioners including the forensic inquiry of digital devices and examination of the material witness, however no relevant material has been found till date on which presumption of question paper leak in the said examination can be made.

¶1252

35. During the course of investigation, four places of alleged occurrences have been identified which are as follows:-

¶1253

(a) Bethany Convent, High School, Makhmandro, Ratu, Ranchi.

¶1254

(b) Kumar B.Ed. College, P.S. Rajganj, Dhanbad.

¶1255

(c) U.P.G. High School Baliapur, Dangipara Nichetola, Dhanbad.

¶1256

(d) 200 yards South of BGS/Basudev Gandhi High School

¶1257

¶1258

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1259

Loyabad, P.S. Loyabad, District- Dhanbad.

¶1260

36. According to learned Advocate General, the instant writ petition (PIL) is vague on fact merely based on certain isolated incidents of candidates overhearing/over-seeing other candidates writing answers, however the same have not been substantiated by any cogent evidence. A bare reading of these incidents and similar nature of allegations explained in the petition makes it clear that those are concocted. It is the own case of the petitioners that they do not know the persons alleged to be involved in the incident of paper leak. No allegation against any public/ government servant has been levelled. The modus operandi of collecting their evidences is same and identical while the places of occurrences are only different. Moreover, the allegation of paper leak is confined to the examination held on 22.09.2024 which only pertains to paper-III, i.e., the General Studies.

¶1261

37. All the alleged witnesses failed to take pictures of the persons who were allegedly scribbling in papers or discussing the answers which clearly indicate malafide on the part of the petitioners.

¶1262

38. From the screenshots of seized mobile phones of four witnesses namely Premlal Thakur, Anil Kumar, Upendra Raut and Ramchandra Mandal, total 187 answers were found, out of which only 123 answers were different as several anwers were common in the screenshots of the mobile phones of those witnesses. Only 66 answers were found matching with JSSC-CGL answers of the said examination.

¶1263

¶1264

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1265

39. Out of 20 questions asked in the reasoning paper of the said examination held on 21.09.2024, 16 questions were repeated from the SSC-CGL examination of 2016 and 4 questions were repeated from UPSC-Civil Services Aptitude Test (CSAT), 2020 & 2021. Similarly, out of 20 questions asked in the Mathematics paper, 10 questions were repeated from SCC-CGL, 2018 and remaining questions were repeated from SSC-CGL 2017, 2018 & UPSC-CSAT, 2022.

¶1266

40. Moreover, out of 20 questions asked in the Reasoning paper of the examination held on 22.09.2024, 16 questions were repeated from the SSC-CGL examination, 2018 and 4 questions were repeated from UPSC-CSAT, 2015. Similarly, out of 20 questions asked in Mathematics paper of the examination held on 22.09.2024, 16 questions were repeated from SCC-CGL, 2021. This implies that considerable number of questions were repeated from the recently held examinations of the SCC-CGL and UPSC-CSAT.

¶1267

41. Pursuant to the public notice issued by the CID, lists of proofs containing 54 proofs were produced by the students which were inquired by the CID wherein it was found that 18 proofs were false, 14 were irrelevant and the rest are under verification by the CID.

¶1268

42. The statement of Santosh Kumar @ Mastana was again taken in which he stated that on 21.09.2024, between 11:00 to 12:00 PM, he received a WhatsApp call from one Deepika, who was a student of his online Mathematics class and she dictated him around 29 answers which were subsequently sent by him to the

¶1269

¶1270

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1271

Deputy Superintendent of Police namely, Vikash Srivastava. After analysis, it was found that 11 answers out of those 29 were similar to the answers which appeared in the JSSCCGL exam held on 22.09.2024. The investigation revealed that out of 11 answers shared by Mastana, 9 were the answers of questions asked in previous SSC- CGL examinations and 2 were repeated from various competitive examinations.

¶1272

43. The statement given by Santosh Mastana was inquired from the student- Deepika by a female Inspector of Police. Deepika stated that she was a student of Santosh Mastana. She was working as clerk in State Bank of India and was also preparing for different competitive examinations. She further stated that she had received the question paper of General Studies of the said examination held on 21.09.2024 in her WhatsApp group at about 3:00 p.m. She started solving the same with her friend Manish and they found that several questions were repeated from the previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL. Manish also told her to solve the questions of SSC-CGL of the years 2018 and 2021. She also stated that she made WhatsApp call to Santosh Mastana but he did not pick up the call. After some time, Santosh Mastana made WhatsApp call to her while she was sovling the previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL of the years 2018 and 2021. During discussion with him about previous years’ questions, she hurriedly dictated the answers of those questions to Santosh Mastana which he thought that the question paper of the said examination was leaked and she knew about it. She further stated that in fact the

¶1273

¶1274

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1275

question paper of the said examination was not leaked, rather she solved and dicussed with Santosh Mastana the previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL which were asked in the examination held on 22.09.2024.

¶1276

44. It has also been alleged by the petitioners that there was incident of question paper leak on 22.09.2024 and due to the said paper leak, there was a huge difference in number of successful candidates as against the candidates who had appeared in the examination on 21.09.2024 as out of total candidates who had appeared on the said date, only 82 successful candidates were called for document verification whereas 2149 successful candidates were called for document verification out of those who had appeared in the examination held on 22.09.2024. In fact, the data analysis reveals that the candidates who had opted ‘Hindi’ as regional language, had appeared in the examination held on 21.09.2024, whereas on 22.09.2024, the candidates who had opted other regional languages namely, ‘Khortha’, ‘Nagpuri’, ‘Santhali’, ‘English’, ‘Ho’ etc., had appeared and maximum and minimum cut-off marks of these papers were significantly higher than that of ‘Hindi’ paper.

¶1277

45. The number of selected candidates from ‘Khortha’ and ‘Nagpuri’ languages alone are 1106 and 589 respectively which is substantial out of the total 2231 selected candidates called for document verification.

¶1278

46. Further, date wise cut-off marks for General Studies papers reveals that minimum and maximum cut-off marks for

¶1279

¶1280

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1281

examination of the said paper held on 21.09.2024 was more than the examination of the said paper held on 22.09.2024 i.e. the alleged date of question paper leak.

¶1282

47. It is thus a clear case of malpractice committed by some fraudsters by convincing few candidates that question papers of the said examination were possessed by them and the answers to the questions would be provided to them if approached. Moreover, the places of occurrence regarding the act of malpractice have been identified and the candidates involved in the same have also been traced out. Therefore, segregation of candidates who allegedly went into the trap of scammers is quite possible. The allegation of paper leak is restricted only to 3 examination centers out of the 824 centers and only 25 candidates have been found qualified from these 3 centers.

¶1283

48. In fact, the scammers had made only guess work of the questions asked in the previous competitive examinations as only 66 answers have matched out of the total 123 answers allegedly disclosed by them.

¶1284

49. The coaching centers invariably allege paper leak in almost all the competitive examinations being conducted by the State/JPSC/JSSC with the evil design of getting those cancelled as holding of frequent examinations benefit them financially.

¶1285

50. Had there been a case of paper leak in a particular examination center, there would have been be a spike of selected candidates from that center, however there is no information regarding any such spike of selected candidates from any

¶1286

¶1287

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1288

particular center, rather the percentage of selected candidates from all the centers involved in the said examination are uniform and consistent.

¶1289

51. The alleged occurrence of question paper leak in the said examination is not at all true, rather it is a co-incidence that the questions asked in the previously held Combined Graduate Level Examinations conducted by the SSC and JSSC have been repeated which are set by the JSSC as per its SOP regarding conducting of competitive examination. The said fact however does not give rise to the presumption that there has been leak of question papers prior to holding of the said examination. The Previous Year Question (PYQ) analysis of similar examinations conducted by the JSSC and other Examination Bodies including SSC is widely available and is a common methodology used in preparation of competitive examinations.

¶1290

52. The police authorities under the supervision of SIT have conducted a detailed and impartial investigation in the instant matter and no material has surfaced to suggest any act of malpractice in the said examination.

¶1291

Argument on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 (JSSC)

¶1292

53. After cancellation the first phase of the said examination earlier held on 28.01.2024 and before commencement of the second phase scheduled to be held on 04.02.2024, JSSC decided to conduct re-examination to ensure complete fairness in the examination. Accordingly, another empaneled agency was outsourced to make arrangement for the said purpose.

¶1293

¶1294

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1295

54. JSSC requested the Deputy Commissioners of all districts of the State of Jharkhand to provide examination centers in order to conduct the said examination on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024. After getting sufficient numbers of examination centers in all the districts, JSSC decided to conduct the examination on the said scheduled dates. The candidates were accordingly informed vide notices dated 13.08.2024 and 04.09.2024 regarding conduct of the said examination scheduled to be held on 21.09.2024 & 22.09.2024. In order to ensure fair and transparent conduct of the examination, the JSSC, vide its letter dated 11.09.2024, requested the Director General of Police, Jharkhand to instruct its officials to conduct inspections in all the hotels, lodges, resorts, guest houses, etc., located in all the districts as well as to make suitable arrangement for fair conduct of the examination under the supervision of the Superintendents of Police of the concerned districts.

¶1296

55. On the scheduled dates i.e. 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024, the JSSC conducted the examination in 823 examination centers under the supervision of district administration.

¶1297

56. The State Government also issued order temporarily suspending the internet services to prevent malpractice and curb spread of rumours through social media during the examination period as well as to ensure the seamless examination process.

¶1298

57. More than 3 lakh candidates appeared the said examination in course of which, not a single complaint regarding leakage of the question paper was received by the JSSC on both

¶1299

¶1300

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1301

the dates i.e., on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 either through e-mail or any other mode after resumption of internet services.

¶1302

58. After conducting the said examination, ‘Khairiyat Reports’ about peaceful conduct of the examination were also sent to the JSSC by the Static Magistrates, Examination Observers and Center Superintendents of the respective districts.

¶1303

59. Moreover, no news regarding leakage of question papers at any examination center in course of the examinations held on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 was published in any newspaper.

¶1304

60. Pursuant to the examination, the JSSC did not receive any complaint either written or through e-mail from any candidate till 25.09.2024 regarding leakage of question paper during the examination process, however a complaint was submitted on 25.09.2024 by two persons namely Ram Chandra Mandal and Prem Lal Thakur before His Excellency, the Governor of Jharkhand about alleged leakage of question paper and repetition of questions which was forwarded to the JSSC on 26.09.2024 by the Governor’s secretariat along with Pen Drive.

¶1305

61. On 26.09.2024, Shri Prakash Kumar [the petitioner No.1 of W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024] and Shri Kunal Pratap Singh-both the proprietors of Coaching Institutes, also submitted complaints of Shri Ashish Kumar, Shri Prem Lal Thakur, Shri Binay Kumar and Shri Ram Chandra Mandal to the JSSC along with Pen Drive and C.D.

¶1306

62. On receipt of the letter dated 25.09.2024 from the Governor’s Secretariat, the Chairman, JSSC, vide office order

¶1307

¶1308

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1309

No. 294 dated 27.09.2024, constituted three- members committee under the chairmanship of Member Secretary, JSSC to enquire into the allegation of question paper leak. The said committee, vide its letters dated 27.09.2024, 28.09.2024, 29.09.2024, 03.10.2024 and 05.10.2024, requested the complainants to provide the original mobile phones through which photographs were allegedly taken, videos and voices were recorded as well as to give affidavit(s) about correctness of the evidences submitted through Pen Drive, but those were never submitted before the said committee. The C.D. submitted by the complainants was examined by the said committee and was found empty.

¶1310

63. The complainants including the petitioner no.1 of W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024 neither produced any affidavit nor submitted other relevant documents before the said enquiry committee despite its repeated direction. The said enquiry committee submitted its report to the Chairman, JSSC on 14.10.2024 in which the allegations of the complainants were not found correct.

¶1311

64. Moreover, SIT has also been constituted by the State Government which is investigating the matter, however till date, no evidence regarding question paper leak of the said examination has been found.

¶1312

65. Thus, the allegation regarding question paper leak is completely false. It may at best be a case of repetition of questions asked in the previously held competitive examinations. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory and other materials

¶1313

¶1314

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1315

collected by the SIT in course of the investigation are also sufficient to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made by the petitioners.

¶1316

Argument made by Mr. Gopal Shankaranarayanan, learned senior counsel for the intervenors (I.A No. 12854 of 2025)

¶1317

66. Learned senior counsel submits that all the applicants of I.A No. 12854 of 2025 belong to the State of Jharkhand who have been successful in the said examination and have been called for document verification. No examination with respect to the Combined Graduate Level posts has been conducted by the JSSC for the last 8 years and for many of the applicants who have pinned their hopes on this avenue, this is their last opportunity to get the jobs. There is no systemic breach in the examination process. Even the breach highlighted by the petitioners is in doubt. The integrity of the examination process is also not affected.

¶1318

67. Learned senior counsel further submits that the present PIL has been filed seeking two remedies; one, for the court monitored SIT regarding allegation of question paper leak, and another, for restraining the appointment process pursuant to declaration of the result of the said examination until the investigation into the matter is completed. Admittedly, the petitioners have neither sought cancellation of the said examination nor for conducting a fresh one.

¶1319

68. The issue concerning proper investigation of the allegations made by the petitioners is to be adjudicated by this Court on the basis of various status reports and affidavits tendered

¶1320

¶1321

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1322

by the State, however following are the admitted facts: -

¶1323

(i) there is no leaked question paper that exists;

¶1324

(ii) the alleged occurrence of question paper leak is concerned with only 1 paper out of 6 papers i.e., the ‘General Studies’ paper held on 22.09.2024.

¶1325

(iii) as many as 57 answers out of the 123 answers do not feature in the General Studies Paper of the examination held on 22.9.2024;

¶1326

(iv) the date and time logs are missing from all the devices of the witnesses who allegedly took pictures of the answers;

¶1327

(v) none of 824 Examination Centres reported any allegation of malpractice;

¶1328

(vi) all 1,24,255 candidates out of 3,04,694 who appeared in the examination and qualified in Paper-I, did so without any allegation levelled against the respective Paper-I conducted on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024;

¶1329

(vii) the internet service was shut down during the examination held on two dates i.e. on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 for preventing any digital sharing of leaked information.

¶1330

69. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vanshika Yadav Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (2024) 9 SCC 743 has lays down the following litmus test to be followed before taking any decision with regard to cancellation of examination: -

¶1331

¶1332

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1333

(i) Whether the alleged breach was at a systemic level;

¶1334

(ii) Whether it affected the integrity of the entire examination process; and

¶1335

(iii) Whether it was possible to segregate the tainted from untainted candidates;

¶1336

70. In the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down the parameters for applying the above mentioned three tests considering inter alia the number of candidates, number of centres, the anomalies in marking, abnormalities in cut- off mark, possibility of isolating the wrongdoers and the availability of Internet to disseminate the purloined information.

¶1337

71. Even in the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) paper leak was admitted, however the Hon’ble Supreme Court found that the same did not appear to be widespread or systemic and as such declined the request for re-examination. Their Lordships observed that if any candidate was found to be tainted, stringent action in accordance with law would be taken against him/her and allowed the CBI investigation to continue while directing the admissions to be made.

¶1338

72. In the present case, there is no question paper leak and if at all, taken at its highest, there is only possibility that some questions might be known to a handful of individuals who had no internet access and as such there is no ground for reexamination. It is also submitted that the affidavit of the JSSC dated 16.10.2025 shows that there is no aberration or abnormality

¶1339

¶1340

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1341

across dates, centres, districts or examinations.

¶1342

73. A comparison of minimum and maximum cut-off marks with respect to the examination of General Studies Paper held on the 1^st day (275/402) and 2^nd day (236/399) would reveal that the cut-off marks for the said paper were almost similar in both the dates. Data with respect to selection of the candidates called for document verification from different test centres reveals that there is no trace of any abnormality. It is not the case of the petitioners that candidates from certain centres have only been selected.

¶1343

Argument on behalf of Mrs. V. Mohana, Senior Advocate, for Intervenors (I.A. No. 12822 of 2025)

¶1344

74. According to learned senior counsel, the present petition has been filed on the basis of vague and isolated incidents that some candidates had seen other candidates outside the examination centers writing answers in piece of papers. A bare reading of these incidents reveals that the allegations are similar in nature and not substantiated by the petitioners. It is their own case that they do not know the persons alleged to be involved in these incidents. No allegation against any public/ government servant has been made. All the alleged witnesses failed to take pictures of the persons who were allegedly scribbling in papers or discussing the answers which clearly proves lack of evidence to challenge the sanctity of the examination process.

¶1345

75. It is clear from the FSL report that call logs were not available in the devices of the witnesses. In some devices,

¶1346

¶1347

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1348

applications relating to 'fake GPS' were found.

¶1349

76. Investigation has been going on for more than 10 months, however no concrete evidence of systemic and widespread leak of question paper has yet been found. No evidence to show leak of paper on social media or use of advanced technology has been found by the investigating agencies. Neither any examination centre has reported any untoward incident nor any question paper or answer sheet has been recovered from anywhere. No other complaint regarding question paper leak has been made except the complaints mentioned in the instant writ petition. No question paper with respect to the said examination has been found in any mobile phone or other devices.

¶1350

77. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has time and again deprecated the practice of cancellation of examination unless systemic malpractice is found to compromise sanctity of the examination. In the present case, no systemic malpractice has been found till now. Only because some previous years’ questions were repeated, the same cannot be a ground to set aside the entire selection process.

¶1351

78. The examination process itself got delayed after the incident of question paper leak occurred in the said examination held on 28.01.2024 due to which appointments on the advertised posts have been lingering adversely affecting morale of the candidates as well as the public at large. Moreover, most of the applicants are in their 30s and 40s.

¶1352

79. Since there is no trace of widespread malpractice and

¶1353

¶1354

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1355

there appears to be only isolated incidents of fraud allegedly committed by some scamsters, this Court may allow the selection procedure to go ahead by appointing the selected candidates subject to final outcome of the investigation. If any of the selected candidates is found to be tainted, then he/she can be removed from the service.

¶1356

Argument made by Mr. Indrajit Sinha on behalf of Intervenor in I.A No. 3789 of 2025

¶1357

80. Learned counsel for the applicants of the said interlocutory application has controverted the contention of the petitioners that there was an unexplained delay in registration of the FIR pursuant to the complaints made on 29.09.2024 causing prejudice to the investigation. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the petitioners cannot invoke writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking registration of an FIR, rather the proper remedy available to them under law was to file a complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 173(4) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioners are attempting to attribute blame on the State authorities for belated registration of the FIR despite unexplained inaction on their part. Such conduct clearly reflects that the petitioners are not acting bona fide.

¶1358

81. The petitioners have not approached this Hon'ble Court with clean hands. If the mobile phones of the petitioners contained evidence of the alleged question paper leak, there was no reason for them not to preserve the same so as to facilitate a fair investigation. On the contrary, the petitioners appear to have

¶1359

¶1360

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1361

tampered with the evidence as it has come to notice from the counter affidavit dated 25.03.2025 filed by the CID that the mobile phones submitted by the petitioners did not contain the log files and GPS location.

¶1362

82. It was further discovered that the mobile phone of one of the witnesses namely Premlal Thakur had an application installed for generating fake GPS locations. Had the petitioners been fair and co-operative in course of investigation, the log files would have been available in their mobile phones and a satisfactory explanation would have also been furnished regarding absence of GPS location in their mobile phones. It is pertinent to note that the absence of GPS location is not confined to a single device, but is common to all three mobile phones submitted by the petitioners which further casts serious doubt on their conduct and bona fide.

¶1363

83. The petitioners of W.P.(S) No. 1476 of 2025 are unsuccessful candidates, who are not assailing the investigation at this stage but are, instead, pressing for scrapping of the entire examination. Such a plea is clearly self-serving as it would directly benefit them by affording another opportunity to reappear in the said examination.

¶1364

Finding of the court

¶1365

84. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

¶1366

¶1367

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1368

Preliminary argument qua maintainability of the present writ petition

¶1369

85. Mrs. V. Mohana, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of some of the intervenors submits that the petitioners have no locus standi to file the present PIL as they are running coaching institutes and have not suffered any legal injury. Even a criminal complaint has been filed by one of the teachers of the coaching institute run by the petitioner no.1.

¶1370

86. It is also contended that nature and purpose of the instant petition is malicious in order to gain popularity as well as filed with ulterior motive for personal gain. The present petition is a delay tactic tool, which has been used to stall the appointment process of successful candidates.

¶1371

87. The law is well-settled that a third person having no bona-fide interest in a proceeding and who is not aggrieved, will have no locus to file Public Interest Litigation.

¶1372

88. It is also submitted that filing of PIL by a third party has been deprecated by the Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State of W.B reported in (2004) 3 SCC 349 and the said principle has subsequently been followed in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan vs. State of Maharashtra & Others reported in (2013) 4 SCC 465 , Neetu vs. State of Punjab & others reported in (2007) 10 SCC 614 .

¶1373

89. We do not wish to go into the said issue in view of the fact that few students have also preferred writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 1476 of 2025 claiming that integrity and sanctity of the

¶1374

¶1375

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1376

said examination had been compromised as the questions related to the said examination were leaked much before commencement of the examination. Looking to the seriousness of the allegation levelled by the petitioners as well as the fact that larger public issue is involved in these cases, this court is taking up the matter so as to decide merit in the claims of the petitioners.

¶1377

Allegation qua paper leak Position of Law relating to Paper Leak

¶1378

90. In the case of Union of India & Others vs. Rajesh P.U. Puthuvalnikathu and Another reported in (2003) 7 SCC

¶1379

285 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under: -

¶1380

“ 6. On a careful consideration of the contentions on either side in the light of the materials brought on record, including the relevant portions of the report said to have been submitted by the Special Committee constituted for the purpose of inquiring into the irregularities, if any, in the selection of candidates, filed on our directions — which report itself seems to have been also produced for the perusal of the High Court — there appears to be no scope for any legitimate grievance against the decision rendered by the High Court. There seems to be no serious grievance of any malpractices as such in the process of the written examination — either by the candidates or by those who actually conducted them. If the Board itself decided to dictate the questions on a loudspeaker in English and Hindi and none of the participants had any grievance in understanding them or answering them, there is no justification to surmise at a later stage that the time lapse in dictating them in different languages

¶1381

¶1382

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1383

left any room or scope for the candidates to discuss among them the possible answers. The posting of invigilators for every ten candidates would belie any such assumptions. Even that apart, the Special Committee constituted does not appear to have condemned that part of the selection process relating to conduct of the written examination itself, except noticing only certain infirmities only in the matter of evaluation of answer-sheets with reference to correct answers and allotment of marks to answers of some of the questions. In addition thereto, it appears that the Special Committee has extensively scrutinized and reviewed the situation by re-evaluating the answersheets of all the 134 successful as well as the 184 unsuccessful candidates and ultimately found that except 31 candidates found to have been declared successful though they were not really entitled to be so declared successful and selected for appointment there was no infirmity whatsoever in the selection of the other successful candidates than the 31 identified by the Special Committee. In the light of the above and in the absence of any specific or categorical finding supported by any concrete and relevant material that widespread infirmities of an all-pervasive nature, which could be really said to have undermined the very process itself in its entirety or as a whole and it was impossible to weed out the beneficiaries of one or the other irregularities, or illegalities, if any, there was hardly any justification in law to deny appointment to the other selected candidates whose selections were not found to be, in any manner, vitiated for any one or

¶1384

¶1385

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1386

the other reasons. Applying a unilaterally rigid and arbitrary standard to cancel the entirety of the selections despite the firm and positive information that except 31 of such selected candidates, no infirmity could be found with reference to others, is nothing but total disregard of relevancies and allowing to be carried away by irrelevancies, giving a complete go-by to contextual considerations throwing to the winds the principle of proportionality in going farther than what was strictly and reasonably to meet the situation. In short, the competent authority completely misdirected itself in taking such an extreme and unreasonable decision of cancelling the entire selections, wholly unwarranted and unnecessary even on the factual situation found too, and totally in excess of the nature and gravity of what was at stake, thereby virtually rendering such decision to be irrational.”

¶1387

91. In the case of Joginder Pal and Others vs. State of

¶1388

Punjab & Others reported in (2014) 6 SCC 644 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as follows: -

¶1389

“ 39. It becomes crystal clear that the concern of the Court was that for the misdeeds of some candidates, honest and meritorious candidates should not suffer. Therefore, endeavour should be made to segregate the tainted candidates from those who were without any stigma and had been selected because of their sheer merit and not on account of any illegal considerations. We would also like to reproduce some of the parts of the concurring judgment authored by Dalveer Bhandari, J. (as His Lordship then was) with the aforesaid message, eloquently and impeccably :(Inderpreet Singh

¶1390

¶1391

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1392

Kahlon case [Inderpreet Singh Kahlon v. State of Punjab, (2006) 11 SCC 356] , SCC pp. 414-15, paras 118 & 124-25)

¶1393

“ 118. Undoubtedly, in the selection process,

¶1394

there have been manipulations and irregularities at the behest of R.S. Sidhu, the then Chairman, Punjab Public Service Commission. On a careful scrutiny of the facts and circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion, the High Court ought to have made a serious endeavour to segregate the tainted from the non-tainted candidates. Though the task was certainly difficult, but by no stretch of imagination, was it an impossible task.

¶1395

*** 124. The High Court has not considered the case in the proper perspective. The consequences of en masse cancellation would carry a big stigma particularly on cancellation of the selections which took place because of serious charges of corruption. The question arises whether for the misdeeds of some candidates, honest and good candidates should also suffer on en masse cancellation leading to termination of their services? Should those honest candidates be compelled to suffer without there being any fault on their part just because the respondents find it difficult to segregate the cases of tainted candidates from the other candidates? The task may be difficult

¶1396

¶1397

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1398

for the respondents, but in my considered view, in the interest of all concerned and particularly in the interest of honest candidates, the State must undertake this task. The unscrupulous candidates should not be allowed to damage the entire system in such a manner where innocent people also suffer great ignominy and stigma.

¶1399

This Court had an occasion to examine a similar controversy in [Onkar Lal Bajaj v. Union of India, (2003) 2 SCC 673] . In that case, there were serious allegations of political patronage in allotment of retail outlets of petroleum products (LPG distributorships and SKO-LDO dealerships). This Court laid down that how could a large number of candidates against whom there was not even insinuation be clubbed with a handful of those who were

¶1400

said to have been allotted dealerships/distributorships on account of political connection and patronage? This Court clearly stated that the two were clearly unequals. Equal treatment to unequals is nothing but inequality. This is the most important principle which has been laid down in this case by this Court. The Court further observed that to put both the categories, tainted and the rest, on a par is wholly unjustified, arbitrary and unconstitutional, being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In somewhat similar circumstances, in this

¶1401

¶1402

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1403

case, the Government, instead of discharging its obligation, unjustly resorted to the cancellation of all the allotments en masse by treating unequals as equals without even prima facie examining their cases. Those officers whose services were affected because of en masse cancellation have not been given an opportunity to represent before the authorities concerned. In Onkar Lal Bajaj [Onkar Lal Bajaj v. Union of India, (2003) 2 SCC 673] there were 413 cases and the task was indeed difficult to segregate the cases of political connection and patronage with other cases. But, even then, this Court, while setting aside the order of the Government cancelling the allotment, appointed a committee of two retired Judges, one of this Court and another from the Delhi High Court, and they were requested to examine all 413 cases and decide the matter after getting the report from that

¶1404

committee appointed by the Court.”

¶1405

40. In view of the above, the issue of entire selection process having been vitiated would have arisen only if the findings of the Committee were that it was not possible to distinguish the cases of tainted from the non-tainted ones and there was a possibility that all of them would have got the benefit of wrongdoings of Mr Sidhu and his accomplices. Fortunately for these appellants, it is not so as they have been found innocent. The appellants get ensconced, earning a safe place, once they are removed from the category of

¶1406

¶1407

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1408

nefarious persons. Though the tainted candidates have rightly received their comeuppance, but the innocent persons cannot be punished with them. Thus, it is difficult to accept the fallible conclusion of the High Court.”

¶1409

92. In the case of Gohil Vishvaraj Hanubhai & Others v.

¶1410

State of Gujarat & Others reported in (2017) 13 SCC 621 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under: -

¶1411

“ 21. Purity of the examination process — whether

¶1412

such examination process pertains to assessment of the academic accomplishment or suitability of candidates for employment under the State — is an unquestionable requirement of the rationality of any examination process. Rationality is an indispensable aspect of public administration under our Constitution. [Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, (1979) 3 SCC 489] The authority of the State to take appropriate measures to maintain the purity of any examination process is unquestionable. It is too well settled a principle of law in light of the various earlier decisions of this Court that where there are allegations of the occurrence of large-scale malpractices in the course of the conduct of any examination process, the State or its instrumentalities are entitled to cancel the examination. [Nidhi Kaim v. State of M.P., (2016) 7 SCC 615 at para 23 : 7 SCEC 611 : (SCC pp. 639-40) “23. Even otherwise, the argument of the appellants is required to be rejected for the following reasons: under the scheme of our Constitution, the executive power of the State is coextensive with its legislative power. In the absence of any operative legislation, the executive

¶1413

¶1414

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1415

power could certainly be exercised to protect the public interest. The right of each one of the appellants herein for admission to the medical colleges in the State of Madhya Pradesh is itself an emanation of the State's executive action. No doubt, even executive action of the State can create rights. Unless there is something either in the Constitution or law which prohibits the abrogation or abridgment of rights, it is permissible for the State to do so by executive action in accordance with some specified procedure of law. No doubt, that the overarching requirement of the Constitution is that every action of the State must be informed with reason and must be in public interest. Nothing has been brought to our notice which prohibits the impugned executive action. If it is established that the adoption of unfair means on large scale resulted in the contamination of the entrance examination (PMT) process of successive years, the State undoubtedly would have the power to take appropriate action to protect the public interest. I, therefore, reject the submission of the appellants.”; In Union of India v. Anand Kumar Pandey, (1994) 5 SCC 663) 1235 large-scale cheating occurred in the Railway Recruitment Board Examination, specifically in two rooms of a centre. The Board took a decision to subject the successful candidates from that centre to a reexamination. This was set aside by the Central Administrative Tribunal on the ground that such a decision was taken in violation of the principles of natural justice. It was held that there cannot be any straitjacket formula for the application of the principles

¶1416

¶1417

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1418

of natural justice. This Court did not find any fault with the decision to conduct a fresh examination.; In All India Railway Recruitment Board v. K. Shyam Kumar, (2010) 6 SCC 614 : (2010) 2 SCC (L&S) 293, largescale malpractices surfaced in the written test. The recruitment board ordered a retest, which was challenged in the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal held that a retest was valid. The High Court reversed invoking the Wednesbury's principles of reasonableness. This Court held that in the face of such large-scale allegations supported by reports of the Vigilance department and CBI, the High Court was wrong in reversing the tribunal's decision.] This Court has on numerous occasions approved the action of the State or its instrumentalities to cancel examinations whenever such action is believed to be necessary on the basis of some reasonable material to indicate that the examination process is vitiated. They are also not obliged to seek proof of each and every fact which vitiated the examination process. [Nidhi Kaim v. State of M.P., (2016) 7 SCC 615see paras 42.1 and 42.2 at p. 649 : 7 SCEC 611]

¶1419

23. The next question is whether the impugned decision could be sustained judged in the light of the principles of Wednesbury [Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corpn., (1948) 1 KB 223 (CA)] unreasonableness”. In the language of Lord Diplock, the principle is that “a decision which is so outrageous in its defiance of logic or of accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived

¶1420

¶1421

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1422

at it”. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the prima facie proof indicating the possibility of

¶1423

occurrence of large-scale tampering with the examination process which led to the impugned action, it cannot be said that the impugned action of the respondent is “so outrageous in its defiance of logic” or “moral standards”. Therefore, the second submission of the appellant is also required to be rejected.”

¶1424

93. In the case of Sachin Kumar & Others vs. Delhi

¶1425

Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSB) & Others

¶1426

reported in (2021) 4 SCC 631 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under: -

¶1427

“ 35. In deciding this batch of SLPs, we need not

¶1428

reinvent the wheel. Over the last five decades, several decisions of this Court have dealt with the fundamental issue of when the process of an examination can stand vitiated. Essentially, the answer to the issue turns upon whether the irregularities in the process have taken place at a systemic level so as to vitiate the sanctity of the process. There are cases which border upon or cross over into the domain of fraud as a result of which the credibility and legitimacy of the process is denuded. This constitutes one end of the spectrum where the authority conducting the examination or convening the selection process comes to the conclusion that as a result of supervening event or circumstances, the process has lost its legitimacy, leaving no option but to cancel it in its entirety. Where a decision along those lines is taken, it does not turn upon a fact-finding exercise into individual acts involving the use of

¶1429

¶1430

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1431

malpractices or unfair means. Where a recourse to unfair means has taken place on a systemic scale, it may be difficult to segregate the tainted from the untainted participants in the process. Large-scale irregularities including those which have the effect of denying equal access to similarly circumstanced candidates are suggestive of a malaise which has eroded the credibility of the process. At the other end of the spectrum are cases where some of the participants in the process who appear at the examination or selection test are guilty of irregularities. In such a case, it may well be possible to segregate persons who are guilty of wrongdoing from others who have adhered to the rules and to exclude the former from the process. In such a case, those who are innocent of wrongdoing should not pay a price for those who are actually found to be involved in irregularities. By segregating the wrongdoers, the selection of the untainted candidates can be allowed to pass muster by taking the selection process to its logical conclusion. This is not a mere matter of administrative procedure but as a principle of service jurisprudence it finds embodiment in the constitutional duty by which public bodies have to act fairly and reasonably. A fair and reasonable process of selection to posts subject to the norm of equality of opportunity under Article 16(1) is a constitutional requirement. A fair and reasonable process is a fundamental requirement of Article 14 as well. Where the recruitment to public employment stands vitiated as a consequence of systemic fraud or irregularities, the entire process becomes illegitimate.

¶1432

¶1433

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1434

On the other hand, where it is possible to segregate persons who have indulged in malpractices and to penalise them for their wrongdoing, it would be unfair to impose the burden of their wrongdoing on those who are free from taint. To treat the innocent and the wrongdoers equally by subjecting the former to the consequence of the cancellation of the entire process would be contrary to Article 14 because unequals would then be treated equally. The requirement that a public body must act in fair and reasonable terms animates the entire process of selection. The decisions of the recruiting body are hence subject to judicial control subject to the settled principle that the recruiting authority must have a measure of discretion to take decisions in accordance with law which are best suited to preserve the sanctity of the process. Now it is in the backdrop of these principles, that it becomes appropriate to advert to the precedents of this Court which hold the field”.

¶1435

94. In the aforesaid case, Their Lordships observed that the report of enquiry committee found deficiencies of a systemic nature which created serious doubts on the legitimacy of the entire recruitment process. Moreover, irregularities were not confined to acts of malpractice or unfair means on the part of a specific group of persons. Looking to the said fact, Their Lordships held that the decision of the government to cancel the entire process cannot be held to be irrational or arbitrary, applying the yardstick of fair procedure and proportionality to the decision making process.

¶1436

95. In the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Baishakhi

¶1437

¶1438

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1439

Bhattarcharya and Others reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC

¶1440

719 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held thus: -

¶1441

“ 7. This Court in several cases has examined the question when the entire selection process should be struck down in case of irregularities. It will be apposite to refer to some of the decisions as the ratio and reasoning, in our opinion, is clear and does not suffer from contradictions. In Sachin Kumar v. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSSB), this Court observed that determining when the examination process is vitiated by irregularities requires an in-depth fact-finding inquiry. The answer lies in examining whether the irregularities were systemic enough to undermine the sanctity of the process. In some cases, the irregularities may border on or even constitute fraud, which severely damages the credibility and legitimacy of the process. In such cases, the only option is to cancel the result entirely. These are situations where it is difficult to separate the tainted from the untainted participants, and the irregularities are widespread, indicating a malaise or fraud that has corrupted the process. On the other hand, there are cases where only some participants have committed irregularities. In such cases, it may be possible to segregate the wrongdoers from those who adhered to the rules. The innocent should not suffer for the actions of the wrongdoers. By segregating the guilty, the selection process for the untainted candidates can proceed to its logical conclusion. This aligns with the principle of equality of opportunity under Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India, as well as the

¶1442

¶1443

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1444

fundamental requirement of Article 14 of

¶1445

the Constitution, which mandates a fair, equitable, and reasonable process. Care must be taken to ensure that the innocent are not unfairly penalized alongside the wrongdoers by cancelling the entire process. To treat the innocent and the wrongdoers equally would violate Article 14 of the Constitution, as it would involve treating unequals equally. The innocent should not be punished for faults they did not commit. Finally, while the decision of the recruiting body is subject to judicial control, the body must retain a measure of discretion.

¶1446

8. Sachin Kumar (supra) refers to an earlier decision of three Judges of this Court in Bihar School Examination Board v. Subhas Chandra Sinha where it was held that when the conduct of all examinees, or at least the vast majority, at a particular examination centre reveals the use of unfair means, it may not be necessary for the board to give individual opportunities of hearing to the candidates if the entire examination is being cancelled. This is not a case where anyone is charged with unfair means and would need to defend themselves. An examination vitiated by widespread unfair means falls into a separate category, so giving notice in individual cases is not required.

¶1447

9. In Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P., Allahabad v. Ghanshyam Das Gupta, a Constitution Bench of this Court held that when there is a discovery of widespread unfair practices, such as the leakage of question papers or destruction of answer books, it may not be necessary to give each examinee an opportunity to be heard. While it may not be appropriate to

¶1448

¶1449

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1450

completely whittle down the requirement of natural justice and fair play, a straitjacket formula cannot be applied when the examination was not properly conducted or when the majority of the examinees did not act as they should have. Therefore, insisting that the Board should hold a detailed inquiry into each individual case was considered incorrect. It was also observed that such an approach would delay the functioning of an autonomous body like the Board of High School and Intermediate Education.

¶1451

10. In line with the above ratio, this Court in Anamica Mishra v. U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad, has held that the cancellation of the entire recruitment process was not justified as there was no systemic flaw in the entire recruitment process, and the issue was only with regard to calling the candidates for interview.

¶1452

However, in Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal, M.P. v. Abhilash Shiksha Prasar Samiti, the entire examination was cancelled in view of the report of mass copying and leakage of the question paper. In Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal, M.P. (supra), the teachers did not object to the students entering the examination hall with books, indicating their complicity. It was held that the fact that some innocent students may have suffered in the given facts was inconsequential.

¶1453

11. Similarly, in Union of India v. Rajesh P.U., Puthuvalnikathu, this Court examined a case where a Special Committee scrutinized the answer sheets of 134 successful and 184 unsuccessful candidates, identifying only 31 as involved in unfair practices. Based on this,

¶1454

¶1455

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1456

the Court struck down the decision of the competent authority to cancel the entire recruitment process, deeming it extreme, unreasonable, and unnecessary given the circumstances. The Court applied the test of whether there were widespread, pervasive issues that had undermined the entire process and whether it was impossible to weed out those benefiting from the irregularities or illegalities.

¶1457

12. In yet another decision in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon v. State of Punjab, this Court elucidated three principles which must be adhered to when cancelling appointments. First, there must be satisfaction regarding the sufficiency of the material collected so as to enable the State to conclude that the selection process was tainted. Second, to determine whether the illegalities committed go to the root of the matter and vitiate the entire selection process, such satisfaction should be based on a reasoned and thorough investigation conducted in a fair and transparent manner. Third, there must be sufficient material to support the conclusion that the majority of the appointments were part of the fraudulent purpose or that the system itself was corrupt. This three-pronged test, as outlined by Sinha J., is appropriate and should be adhered to.

¶1458

13. The precursor to Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) involved raids that led to the recovery of large sums of cash from the house of the Chairman of the Punjab Public Service Commission. The allegations suggested that the Chairman - who served from 1996 to 2002 - had made several appointments between 1998 and

¶1459

¶1460

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1461

2001 for extraneous considerations, including monetary ones. The affected appellants before this Court, whose services were terminated, comprised four categories of officers selected through four recruitment examinations held between 1997 and 2001. Two FIRs came to be registered against the Chairman and other officers of the Public Service Commission. However, among the selectees, an FIR was filed only against one. In this factual background, Sinha J. drew a distinction between a proven case of mass cheating in a Board Exam and an unproven charge of corruption in the context of appointment of a civil servant. The en masse termination order setting aside several selections spread over 3-4 years was reversed. This was an unprecedented case of mass termination, with a walloping impact and consequences. Applying the threefold factual and legal test, en masse termination was set aside. In this context, it was observed that termination orders should only be issued in cases where it is found to be impossible or highly improbable to separate the tainted cases from the non-tainted ones.

¶1462

14. In our considered view, the opinion expressed by Dalveer Bhandari J. in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) regarding the strict compliance with the principles of natural justice is not in line with the ratio of the earlier three Judge Bench decision in Bihar School Examination Board (supra). We would like to observe that the en masse termination in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) was based on the charge of corruption against the former Chairman, leading to the cancellation of the entire selection process and appointments, even though

¶1463

¶1464

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1465

the charges against him had not yet been proven in a court of law.

¶1466

15. Similarly, in another two Judge Bench decision in Joginder Pal v. State of Punjab32, this Court observed that every effort should be made to separate tainted from untainted candidates, and if it is found that segregating the tainted from untainted is possible, cancellation of the entire selection process would be incompatible with law.

¶1467

16. In Chairman, All India Railways Recruitment Board v. K. Shyam Kumar, where the decision of the Railway Recruitment Board to cancel the examination and conduct retest on the ground of malpractices involving mass copying, leakage of question paper and impersonation was struck down by the High Court, this Court - reversing the judgment of the High Court - upheld the order of the Board to cancel the examination and conduct retest. Considering the material on record, the widespread irregularities and malpractice in the first written test, and the ultimate object of fair selection, this Court upheld the finding of the Board that the test was vitiated due to mass copying, impersonation, and question paper leakage, rather than misconduct by just a few candidates. In the said facts and circumstance, the decision of the Board to cancel the selection and reconduct the examination was held to be reasonable and well-balanced.

¶1468

17. In State of Tamil Nadu v. A. Kalaimani, there were allegations of large-scale malpractices involving tampering with OMR sheets. After re-evaluation and further scrutiny, the Teachers Recruitment Board found

¶1469

¶1470

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1471

that 196 candidates had been the beneficiaries of fraudulent alteration of marks. This Court referred to the observations in Gohil Vishvaraj Hanubhai v. State of Gujarat35 to hold that the authority of the State to maintain the purity of the examination process is unquestionable. Gohil Vishvaraj Hanubhai (supra) takes note of the settled dictum that the cancellation of the examination is necessary and required in cases where large-scale malpractices in the course of the conduct of any examination process are alleged. In this context, this Court in A. Kalaimani (supra) held that despite the inconvenience caused to the untainted candidates, a serious doubt regarding the magnitude of manipulation in the examination has to be given due weightage. It was held that the finding of the Board that there were chances of more people being involved in the manipulation of marks was a bona fide decision being taken by the Board to instil confidence in the public regarding the integrity of the selection process.

¶1472

18. In Vanshika Yadav v. Union of India, this Court observed that a holistic view must be adopted by assessing the extent of unfair means used and whether it is possible to separate the tainted candidates from the untainted ones. The court must ensure that allegations of malpractice are substantiated and that the material on record, including investigative reports, supports this conclusion. There must be at least some evidence for the court to reach such a conclusion. However, the standard of evidence need not be unduly strict. Specifically, the material on record need not point to a single, definitive conclusion that malpractice

¶1473

¶1474

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1475

occurred at a systemic level. Nevertheless, there must be a real possibility of systemic malaise, as reflected in the material before the court.

¶1476

19. The following principles emerge from the aforesaid discussion:

¶1477

When an in-depth factual inquiry reveals systemic irregularities, such as malaise or fraud, that undermine the integrity of the entire selection process, the result should be cancelled in its entirety. However, if and when possible, segregation of tainted and untainted candidates should be done in consonance with fairness and equity.

¶1478

The decision to cancel the selection en masse must be based on the satisfaction derived from sufficient material collected through a fair and thorough investigation. It is not necessary for the material collected to conclusively prove malpractice beyond a reasonable doubt. The standard of evidence should be reasonable certainty of systemic malaise. The probability test is applicable.

¶1479

Despite the inconvenience caused to untainted candidates, when broad and deep manipulation in the selection process is proven, due weightage has to be given to maintaining the purity of the selection process.

¶1480

Individual notice and hearing may not be necessary in all cases for practical reasons when the facts establish that the entire selection process is vitiated with illegalities at a large scale.”

¶1481

96. In the said case, Their Lordships cancelled the selection

¶1482

process looking to the fact of the said case that there were large scale manipulation and fraud coupled with the attempted cover-up

¶1483

¶1484

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1485

which had dented the selection process beyond repair and partial redemption.

¶1486

97. The case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) has been heavily relied upon by the intervenors as well as the State and it has been submitted that even in the said case, Their Lordships had found that there was incident of paper leak, however the examination process was not cancelled holding inter alia that there was no breach at systemic level and the segregation of the tainted candidates was possible. It is further submitted on behalf of the intervenors that in the present case, no incident of paper leak has been found and as such, the present writ petition may be dismissed applying the ratio of Vanshika Yadav (supra.) .

¶1487

98. On the other hand, learned senior counsels for the petitioners submit that in the case of Vanshika Yadav (supra.), the NEET examination was conducted on 05.05.2024, and the matter was promptly transferred to the CBI, which filed status reports on 10.07.2024, 17.07.2024, and 21.07.2024, each affirming that the investigation was progressing in a structured and timebound manner. Moreover, within a span of just three months, the CBI succeeded in segregating the tainted candidates by completing the investigation and submitted comprehensive findings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, the investigation in the present case stands on the footing of inconsistency and delay. Despite the matter being under scrutiny of this Court for a period of more than ten months, there is neither conceptual clarity nor evidentiary coherence in the manner the investigation has proceeded. The

¶1488

¶1489

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1490

investigation has oscillated between contradictory findings, frequently altered SITs and selective reliance on evidence that too all without achieving even a fraction of the progress as observed in the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) .

¶1491

99. It is further submitted that the evidence on record including registered FIRS, seized devices, call-records and confessional statements along with the State's stand taken before different Forums would demonstrate a pervasive, organised network operating across multiple districts, rendering segregation of the tainted candidates impossible. The proportionality concerns which weighed with the Supreme Court in the NEET-UG examination (involving 23 lakh candidates) have no application to a State-level recruitment examination being comparatively of limited scale. Accordingly, the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) neither governs nor puts constrains on the adjudication of these petitions; on the contrary, it re-affirms that where a systemic breach exists and segregation of tainted candidates is impracticable, rather annulment of the examination is the only constitutionally permissible course. 100. We have perused the judgment rendered in the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.). In the said case, as per the report submitted by the CBI, the investigation was ongoing and till that time, it surfaced from the materials gathered during the investigation that about 155 students from the examination centres at Hazaribagh and Patna were the beneficiaries of fraud (around 30 in Patna and around 125 in Hazaribagh). No material

¶1492

¶1493

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1494

was placed by the CBI before the Hon’ble Supreme Court to demonstrate that the question paper or the solved answers were circulated at random or en masse over social media.

¶1495

101. In the said case, their Lordships have held that cancellation of an examination, which has been conducted either for the purposes of getting admission into professional and other courses or for the purpose of recruitment to a government post, is justified only in such situation where sanctity of the examination is found to be compromised at a systemic level. Courts may direct cancellation of an examination or may approve such cancellation made by the competent authority only if it is not possible to separate the tainted candidates from the untainted ones.

¶1496

102. Their Lordships have further held that the purpose of testing whether the integrity of the examination has been compromised at a systemic level is to ensure that the cancellation of the examination which has already taken place and conducting a fresh examination is a proportionate response. This is also why the Courts are required to assess the extent of the use of unfair means and separately consider whether it is possible to separate the tainted and the untainted candidates.

¶1497

103. It has also been held that in arriving at a conclusion as to whether an examination suffers from widespread issues, the Courts must ensure that the allegations of malpractice are substantiated and that the material on record including investigative reports point to that conclusion. There must be at least some evidence to allow the Court to reach that conclusion. To

¶1498

¶1499

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1500

elaborate, it is not necessary for the material on record to point to one and only conclusion which is that the malpractice has taken place at a systemic level, however there must be a real possibility of systemic malaise as borne out from the material before the Court.

¶1501

104. Their Lordships finally came to the conclusion that undoubtedly the question paper of NEET was leaked at certain centers and some students were indulged in malpractice, however there were no abnormalities in the results declared for the year 2024 concerning the centers in controversy when compared with the results of past two years. Hence, an analysis of the result did not lend support to the case of the petitioners of Vanshika Yadav (supra) who sought cancellation of the examination. The leak of the question paper did not appear to be widespread or systemic, rather the same was restricted to isolated incidents in some cities, which had been identified by the police or were also in the process of being identified by the CBI.

¶1502

105. Their Lordships did not find a systemic leak or systemic malpractice of other forms. It was further observed that the CBI investigation had revealed the number of students who were the beneficiaries of the malpractice or fraud at the examination centers of Hazaribagh and Patna and it was possible to separate them from the honest students.

¶1503

106. The case of Tanvi Sarwal (Supra.) which has been relied upon by the petitioners in the present case, was distinguished by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while adjudicating the

¶1504

¶1505

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1506

case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) by observing as under:-

¶1507

“ 91. Tanvi Sarwal v. CBSE, (2015) 6 SCC 573 is distinguishable from the case before us on many counts. First and foremost, the unscrupulous candidates in that case used sophisticated technology including vests fitted with micro SIMs to cheat. No such technology has come to light at present, in this case. Second, the question paper was found to have been shared on WhatsApp before the date of the exam. Once shared through social media, it is exceedingly difficult to trace the journey of a post or message or document. Here, the record at present does not indicate that the question paper was shared on social media before the date of the exam. Third, in Tanvi Sarwal case, the assistance of a gang with a nationwide network was stated to have been taken and calls were made by the accused to persons living in numerous States in the country. No such nationwide ring is seen at present in this case. Fourth, the Court found that it was not possible to separate the beneficiaries of the leak from the honest candidates. Here, the Court has concluded that the fraudulent candidates may be identified by the investigating agency. For these reasons, the decision in [Tanvi Sarwal v. CBSE, (2015) 6 SCC 573] does not support the case of the petitioners. The allegations in this case are not substantiated by the material on record.”

¶1508

107. Further, the case of Sachin Kumar (Supra.) was also

¶1509

distinguished by the Hon’ble Supreme Court from facts of the case

¶1510

of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) by observing as under:-

¶1511

“ 95. The question in [Sachin Kumar v. Dsssb, (2021) 4

¶1512

¶1513

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1514

SCC 631] was whether the decision to cancel the recruitment process was justified. The Court held that the credibility of the entire exam stood vitiated by systemic irregularities, as highlighted by the findings of the first committee appointed by the Government. It found that the allegations made regarding the sanctity of the exam had been substantiated by the investigation which followed. It therefore upheld the decision of the Deputy Chief Minister to cancel the exam and set aside the judgment [Dsssb v. Puneet Kumar, (2020) 1 HCC (Del) 500] of the High Court.

¶1515

96. That case, too, is distinct from the one before us. In Sachin Kumar v. Dsssb, (2021) 4 SCC 631], the material before the Court was sufficient to lead to the conclusion that there was mass malpractice, which attacked the integrity of the exam at a systemic level. This is indicated by the fact that a large number of candidates in the zone of selection were from the same concentrated geographical region and that candidates from the same family were sitting in consecutive spots during the exam. There was also impersonation and the coordinated dilution of security protocols in that case. There was an abundance of material before the Court in that case. The same cannot be said to be true in the instant case. Hence, the ruling in that case cannot influence the outcome in this case. Moreover, in cases such as these, courts must take a holistic view of the facts before them and reach an independent conclusion. Different courses of action are appropriate

¶1516

in different circumstances.”

¶1517

108. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vanshika

¶1518

¶1519

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1520

Yadav (Supra.) has laid down three-fold test to be followed in a case relating to paper leak: -

¶1521

(i) Whether the breach occurred at a systemic level?

¶1522

(ii) Whether such breach compromised the integrity of the entire examination process?

¶1523

(iii) Whether it is possible to segregate tainted from untainted candidates?

¶1524

109. Learned Advocate General has put reliance on the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of Patna High Court in the case of Anand Legal Aid Forum Trust Vs. Bihar Public Service Commission & Others (with other analogous cases) reported in 2025 Supreme (Pat) 182 . In the said case, the petitioners had prayed for cancellation of integrated 70^th Combined (Preliminary) Competitive Examination conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission held on 13.12.2024 and 04.01.2025 and for holding a re-examination. The said writ petitions were dismissed by the Bench holding that though the question papers were leaked at about 1:00 p.m. on 13.12.2024, but that was isolated and episodic incident at one particular centre and that was the time when all the examinees were sitting in sanitized examination halls. It was further held that few of the questions in the examination tallying with questions in the Model Question Paper of the coaching centres was no proof of the Commission having taken Questions Banks from such coaching centres.

¶1525

110. It emerges from the aforesaid judgments that an examination cannot be annulled on mere conjecture and surmises

¶1526

¶1527

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1528

since holding of fresh examination ultimately delays the entire selection process as well as it imposes financial burden over the State. Moreover, annulment of examination without proper cause will be detrimental to the students who are not at fault. En masse cancellation is resorted to only on finding that segregation of the tainted candidates from the untainted ones is difficult and a timeconsuming task. Annulment of examination is ordered only when it is sufficiently established that the defects/malpractices found therein are to such an extent so as to make it impossible for the examining authority or the Court to determine a fair result of the examination. Every case has to be decided in its own facts and circumstance. In any particular case, if after an in-depth inquiry, it is found that there is systemic irregularities and mass malpractices, the result should be cancelled in its entirety. However, if and when segregation of tainted and untainted candidates is possible, it should be done in consonance with fairness and equity. When broad and deep manipulation in the selection process is proved vitiating its purity, the examination process should be cancelled even if the same would cause inconvenience to the untainted candidates.

¶1529

111. Thus, the issue before this Court is as to whether the facts of the present case reflect that the alleged breach levelled by the petitioners has been at a systemic level and it affected the integrity of the entire examination process or it is possible to segregate the tainted from the untainted candidates.

¶1530

¶1531

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1532

The Court’s analysis

¶1533

112. So far the allegation that some candidates were taken to Nepal where they were asked to memorize the answers of few questions is concerned, it is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the counter affidavits dated 06.05.2025 and 16.06.2025 filed by the CID, Ranchi are quite relevant in understanding the depth of the irregularities occurred in the said examination and the deliberate concealment of material facts by the investigating authorities.

¶1534

113. It is further contended that the contents of these affidavits are self-evident that the incident of question paper leak occurred prior to the examination held on 22.09.2024 and the money changed hands after completion of the examination as consideration for pre-examination access to the question papers.

¶1535

114. It is also contended that the chargesheet of the accused persons discloses specific factual circumstances demonstrating a well-organised nexus between the intermediaries and the candidates. If the money had been paid in anticipation of receiving the question papers, one could plausibly infer an element of deceit or extortion, but in the present case, payments were made after completion of the test that too by the candidates who subsequently succeeded in the same and thus are incapable of any reasonable explanation. The investigating authorities confirm that the question papers were already compromised prior to conduct of the examination and that the recipients of the leaked materials reciprocated the intermediaries by paying them money only after

¶1536

¶1537

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1538

obtaining the benefits. The evidence of post-examination financial trails, therefore, stands as an unassailable indicator of actual incident of question paper leak, rather than mere solicitation.

¶1539

115. It is further submitted that despite several incriminating materials, the investigation appears to have been selectively pursued. None of the successful candidates named in the counteraffidavit filed by the CID on 06.05.2025, has either been chargesheeted or examined as witness. This deliberate omission suggests a conscious effort to shield the beneficiaries while prosecuting only subordinate personnel.

¶1540

116. The position adopted by the State is not the product of a comprehensive or impartial investigation, rather it is the result of a manifest failure to conduct the same. The composition of the SIT has been altered at least thrice and every time, the change has been affected without any judicial order or cogent justification. Such frequent re-constitution of the SIT not only undermines the continuity of the investigation, but also raises apprehension of interference and manipulation.

¶1541

117. It is also argued that the SIT was changed even after the filing of the counter-affidavit dated 06.05.2025, in which the CID had made substantial progress and had uncovered concrete evidence regarding the question paper leak and the related monetary transactions. The CID's subsequent charge-sheets dated 16.06.2025 and 12.09.2025 further reinforced these findings establishing through forensic and documentary proof that the evidences submitted by the petitioners were authentic and un-

¶1542

¶1543

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1544

tampered. Instead of allowing the CID to continue its inquiry on the right track, the State abruptly replaced the investigating team by falsely representing that such a change was made pursuant to the directions of this Court which is apparently not supported by any order of record.

¶1545

118. It is further contended that the investigation has conspicuously ignored material evidence voluntarily furnished by the public. The CID, through public notices, had invited information via e-mails, telephone calls, and WhatsApp messages, however neither any reference to these communications finds place in any subsequent status report nor the State has disclosed as to whether veracity of the leads received in this case was ever verified.

¶1546

119. We have perused the counter affidavits dated 06.05.2025 and 16.06.2025 filed by the CID. In the said affidavits, it has been stated that the names of 28 candidates were found in the mobile phones of the accused persons namely Kundan, Kaushlesh Kumar and others and out of the said 28 candidates, 10 have qualified in the said examination. Some candidates have also given money to the accused persons. It has further been stated that as per the analysis of CDRs of 28 candidates mentioned in the list, location of the mobile phones possessed by 15 candidates were at Beerganj (Nepal)/Raxaul/Motihari (Bihar). It has further been stated in the said counter affidavits that none of the candidates was given question papers, rather they were provided questions and answers

¶1547

¶1548

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1549

jotted down in five to six hand written sheets and they were told to memorize.

¶1550

120. Thus, the claim of the petitioners that in the said counter affidavits, it was stated by the CID that there was incident of question paper leak prior to the examination held on 22.09.2024, does not find support from the materials available on record.

¶1551

121. The SIT has submitted the updated report dated 16.09.2025 before this Court, the relevant part of which is quoted hereinbelow: -

¶1552

Report of SIT

¶1553

(1) Total of 28 Candidates were said to be taken to Nepal of which only 10 could qualify.

¶1554

(2) From the screenshot of the seized mobiles of four witnesses namely 1. Premlal Thakur, 2. Anil Kumar 3. Upendra Raut, and 4. Ramchandra Mandal, it was found that no question or question papers were given to them. 187 answers of ‘General Studies’ paper were disclosed by the candidates, which appears to be guess work, since only 66 answers were found to be randomly tallying with the set 'A' question paper of the said subject.

¶1555

(3) A photo of handwritten paper having list of 28 CGL candidates and their agents were found from mobile phone of accused IRB constable Kundan Kumar @ Mantu. The said accused had to collect

¶1556

¶1557

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1558

money from them. A diary which has been seized from Sandeep Tripathi, has names of candidates and agents. A list of names of candidates were also found in the mobile phone of accused Kundan Kumar @ Mantu. It is also suspicious why the person who took photographs of scattered papers having leaked answers did not take the photographs of persons who were mugging up the so-called leaked answers. Hence the persons allegedly having leaked answers could not be identified.

¶1559

(4) During the investigation it was revealed that the location of all 28 candidates was found at Motihari and Raxaul in Bihar. The location of conspirators Sandeep Tripathi, Vivek Ranjan, Bablu and Hari Singh @ Binay Sah were found in Motihari and Raxaul during that period.

¶1560

(5) Out of 10 successful candidates only four successful candidates namely 1. Arvind Kumar 2. Vibhuti Aman 3. Diwakar Kumar Dev 4. Upendra Yadav have made statements that they had gone to Birgunj, Nepal but were not given any question or answer related to CGL examination by the agents. Only one one successful candidate Dayanand Yadav stated that some handwritten answers were taught by Hari Singh @ Binay Sah in Birgunj, Nepal.

¶1561

(6) During investigation, it was found that five of the

¶1562

¶1563

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1564

IRB-08, Godda constables who were working as agents, namely 1. Kundan Kumar 2. Gaurav Kumar 3. Abhilash Kumar 4. Krishna Sanehi and 5. Akhilesh Kumar, have been arrested for extorting money from the candidates and out of these five constables only one namely Krishna Sanehi is successful candidate.

¶1565

(7) The involvement of Binay Sah and Anish Singh have been found as the main conspirators in duping the candidates and extorting money from them. Their names and addresses have been verified, notices have been served to their family members and warrant has been issued by the Learned Court, and CID team is trying to locate and arrest them.

¶1566

(8) For the compliance of warrant of Anish Singh and Binay Sah, a team was sent to Kolkata and Gorakhpur respectively on date-2/9/2025 but they are absconding.

¶1567

(9) Till date, there is no sufficient evidence has been found to support organised paper leak and no original question papers have been found/recovered in any mobile or electronic evidence or in physical mode. No witness so far has given any statement that he/she had or had seen the question paper. The arrested accused have extorted money from the candidates in the name of providing the question papers of JSSC CGL exam, for which sufficient evidence have been

¶1568

¶1569

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1570

found but no evidence have been found so far of the papers leaked in an organized manner and no original questions paper of 150 questions has been found in any mobile or electronic device. Supplementary investigation is in progress as per the instructions given by SIT.

¶1571

122. There does not appear any inconsistency between the report of the SIT and the statements made in the counter affidavits dated 06.05.2025 and 16.06.2025 filed by the CID. Though the SIT found that there was sufficient evidence regarding extortion of the candidates by the arrested accused on the pretext of providing question papers and answers of JSSC-CGL examination, but no evidence has been found that there was any incident of question paper leak in an organized manner as no original question paper containing 150 questions in total has been found in the storage of any mobile phone or electronic device.

¶1572

123. Out of 28 candidates who were allegedly taken to Nepal and were given some questions & answers for mugging up, only 10 got selected for document verification. Thus, the ratio of selected candidates is less than 50% and the said fact appears to be consistent with the report of the SIT to the effect that the accused persons had extorted money from the said 28 students on the pretext of providing them questions/answers of the said examination. Moreover, they were allegedly provided 187 guess questions of the ‘General Studies’ paper, out of which

¶1573

¶1574

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1575

only 66 questions were found to be randomly tallying with the set 'A' question paper of the said subject.

¶1576

124. The petitioners have disclosed some specific instances of alleged malpractice and question paper leak of the said examination, which are mentioned as under: -

¶1577

(a) Case of Ramchandra Mandal :- Upon his arrival at the Baliyapur Examination Center in the morning, prior to the commencement of the examination, he observed that a person who might be a co-candidate, was engaged in a conversation on mobile phone while simultaneously noting down the answer options on a piece of paper. He did not even imagine that the conversation of said co- candidate was regarding the questions to be asked in the forthcoming examination, however he cleverly captured photograph of the said piece of paper held by the concerned candidate with his mobile phone and after coming out from the examination hall, when he tallied the picture of paper captured by him with the question paper asked in the examination, he found that the same actually contained questions and answers which were asked in the said examination. In view of the shutdown of the internet facility at that time, he could not report the matter, however it clearly goes to suggest that question paper of the said examination was leaked well in advance and

¶1578

¶1579

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1580

answers of the same were shared with a limited group of candidates so that they could get an edge over others in order to coming in the zone of consideration amongst 2021 candidates who have to be declared successful for offering appointments. He is still possessing his device to prove all what has been said and experienced by him.

¶1581

(b) Case of Prem Lal Thakur : - He was appearing in the said examination at Kumar B.Ed. College Center in Dhanbad and during course of moving towards the centre on his motorcycle with one of his friends, they saw a co-candidate having conversation over mobile phone with someone and noting down things on his notebook. After having doubts, they questioned the concerned candidate who suspiciously torn the page into pieces and threw the same besides the road itself. His friend videographed everything through his mobile phone and after coming out from the examination center when the torn papers were arranged, it became evident that the said paper contained the questions & answers which were asked in the examination.

¶1582

(c) Case of Ashish Kumar : - He was going towards his examination centre i.e., ‘Makhmandro Examination Center at Ratu, Ranchi’ and observed that one individual, believed to be a co-candidate, was talking

¶1583

¶1584

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1585

on mobile phone while noting down on a piece of paper. He recorded this incident and noted the answers which were written by the said co-candidate on a newspaper. After completion of the examination, he found upon comparison that the answers were matched in verbatim with the answers of the said examination. He took photograph of the newspaper with his mobile phone and preserved the original newspaper to demonstrate that the paper of the examination was leaked well in advance.

¶1586

(d) Case of Upendra Raut – When he was walking near his examination center i.e B.G.S School, Dhanbad he found that one student was mugging up the answers and on query he told that he was memorizing the answers of the said examination but he did not disclose his name and address and fled away, however he had succeeded in taking photo of the answers which were same as asked in the said examination.

¶1587

(e) Case of Anil Kumar :– His Center was at Manford School Dhanbad. At Patna Railway Station he found that two students were discussing the questions/answers of the said examination which he recorded in his mobile phone and after examination, he found that out of the noted questions/answers, 35-40 were matched with the questions asked in the

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

said examination.

125. The allegations levelled by the aforesaid students were inquired by the SIT and it was found that out of 187 answers traced out from the seized mobile phones of 1. Premlal Thakur, 2. Ramchandra Mandal, 3. Upendra Raut and 4. Anil Kumar, only 123 answers were different as several answers were common in the screenshots of mobile phones of more than one person. On matching those answers with Set A ‘General Studies’ paper of JSSC examination, only 66 answeers were randomly found matching with the answer key.

¶1592

Name of witnesses	Number of answers scribbled by them on a piece of paper	Answers tallied with the examination paper
Ramchandra Mandal	55	35
Prem Lal Thakur	26	19
Upendra Raut	49	33
Anil Kumar	57	25

¶1593

126. It thus indicates that about 53% of the said 123 answers found in screenshots matched with the answer key of the questions of the ‘General Studies’ paper held on 22.09.2024. None of the above persons have claimed that they had seen any of the co-candidates possessing the original question paper of the said examination.

¶1594

127. As regards the statement of Santosh Mastana, it is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the SIT has discarded his statement by stating that he had initially omitted the name of

¶1595

¶1596

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1597

his student namely ‘Deepika’ but included her name in his subsequent statement. The said inconsistency, however, does not affect the substance of his evidence, which has remained intact regarding the factum of question paper leak. His testimony is corroborative in nature and cannot be discredited on the basis of trivial or technical discrepancies.

¶1598

128. It is further submitted that the statement of Deepika warrants greater scrutiny as she herself is one of the intervenors in I.A. No. 13039 of 2025 and thereby making her an interested party whose deposition is self-serving. One more person namely ‘Manish’ who has also supported the statement of Deepika is also one of the intervenors in this case.

¶1599

129. It is argued that out of the vast corpus of previous years' SSC- CGL questions, only 29 questions were purportedly discussed by Deepika with Santosh Mastana, out of which 11 exactly matched with the questions that appeared in the said examination. What is even more strikingly is that 02 of these 11 matched questions were not at all from previous years’ SSC-CGL, but from Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission, 2012 and Intelligence Bureau- Assistant Central Intelligence Officer, 2017 examinations. The possibility of randomly identifying such questions with complete accuracy, especially in mathematics part of the ‘General Studies’ paper, without prior knowledge of the leaked content, is virtually non-existent. This statistical anomaly itself constitutes strong circumstantial evidence that the ‘General Studies’ paper was indeed compromised before the said

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

examination.

130. We have perused the statement of ‘Santosh Mastana’ who had claimed that on 21.09.2024, between 11:00 PM to 12:00 midnight, he received a whatsapp call from Deepika, who was a student of his online Maths class and she dictated him around 29 answers out of which 11 answers matched in the JSSC-CGL examination held on 22.09.2024. The veracity of the said statement of ‘Santosh Mastana’ was enquired from ‘Deepika’ by a female Inspector of Police, however she denied such claim of Santosh Mastana by stating that she had not dictated any answer or question of upcoming JSSCCGL examination to him, rather she had just told him that several questions from previous years’ SSCCGL examinations were asked in JSSC- CGL examination held on 21.09.2024.

¶1604

131. The police also recorded the statement of ‘Manish Kumar’ who told that he and Deepika used to help each other in preparation of competitive examinations and when the question paper of JSSC CGL held on 21.09.2024 was uploaded on WhatsApp after completion of the examination, he analyzed and found that many questions were matching with SSC CGL previous years’ papers. As such, he told ‘Deepika’ to solve previous five years’ questions of SSC-CGL examination.

¶1605

132. The SIT issued directions to analyze the question papers of the said examination held on both the dates i.e. 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 and after analysis, it was found that in 3^rd paper (General Studies) of the said examination held on 21.09.2024, 89

¶1606

¶1607

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1608

out of 150 questions were repeated from previous years’ questions of various examinations. However, majority of Maths and Reasoning questions were repeated from SSC-CGL examinations. Moreover, in the 3^rd Paper of the said examination held on 22.09.2024, 90 out of 150 questions were repeated from previous years’ questions of various examinations. On the said date also, majority of Maths and Reasoning questions were repeated from the previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL examination. So far 66 questions asked in the said examination held on 22.09.2024 which matched with the questions recovered from the mobile phones of the witnesses, it was found that 49 out of the said 66 questions, i.e. 74%, were from previous years’ question of SSC-CGL and other examinations.

¶1609

133. After analyzing the aforesaid facts, the SIT was of the view that several questions of JSSCCGL examination held on 21.09.2024 were found repeated from previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL. On the same date i.e. 21.09.2024, in ‘General Studies’ paper, 85% questions of Maths and all questions of Reasoning got repeated from previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL examination as well as other examinations. Out of the repeated questions, most were from previous years’ question of SSC-CGL examination. The similar trend was also followed in the examination held on 22.09.2024. 90% questions of Maths and all questions of Reasoning in the examination held on 22.09.2024 got repeated from previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL examination as well as othe examinations. Thus, Deepika and Manish started solving

¶1610

¶1611

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1612

previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL examinations which was wrongly projected by Santosh Mastana as leaked questions for upcoming JSSC-CGL examination. Moreover, as per the statement of Santosh Mastana, out of 29 questions told to him by Deepika, 11 questions matched and thus the ratio of matched questions was less than 50%. Conclusion of question paper leak cannot be made on the basis of conjecture and surmises unless concrete evidence of paper leak is found.

¶1613

134. A supplementary counter affidavit was filed by the respondent nos. 3 to 5 on 17.10.2025 annexing a copy of Press Release (Annexure-M to the said counter affidavit). In the said Press Release, seat matrix summary report, data related to shortlisted candidates from common merit list called for document verification district/centre wise along with other relevant data have been furnished, which have not been controverted by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The said data are given hereunder for the ready reference in the present case:-

¶1614

Seat Matrix Summary Report of JGGLCCE-2023 for the

¶1615

examinations held on 21.09.2024 & 22.09.2024

¶1616

Sl. No.	Name of Division	Name of District	No. of School	Seating Capacity
1.	Santhal Pargana	GODDA	17	6192
2.		JAMTARA	17	4584
3.		PAKUR	15	5616
4		DUMKA	30	9396
5		DEOGHAR	44	15840
6		SAHIBGANJ	13	3036
7	PALAMU	PALAMU	16	7476
8		GARHWA	19	5292
9		LATEHAR	18	3948

¶1617

¶1618

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1619

10	SOUTH CHHOTAN AGPUR	RANCHI	136	61284
11		GUMLA	17	5820
12.		LOHARDAGA	20	5796
13		SIMDEGA	10	4140
14		KHUNTI	14	4620
15	KOLHAN	WEST SINGHBHUM	28	10488
16		EAST SINGHBHUM	82	37368
17		SARAIKELA KHARSAWAN	30	12864
18	NORTH CHHOTAN	HAZARIBAGH	70	26148
19	AGPUR	DHANBAD	74	28116
20		RAMGARH	35	10452
21		CHATRA	14	5148
22		KODERMA	19	7080
23		BOKARO	64	29700
24		GIRIDIH	22	10560
		Grand Total	824	320964

¶1620

Center-wise selection data

¶1621

Sl.no.	No. of centers	Percentage selection document verification
1.	13	2-2.6%
2.	17	1.50-1.99%
3.	48	1-1.49%
4.	133	0.5-0.99%
5.	All other centers	Less than 0.5%

¶1622

135. It is evident from center-wise compiled data that no center has shown a selection rate that could be considered anomalous or unusually high.

¶1623

¶1624

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1625

District wise analysis of shortlisted candidates for

¶1626

Document Verification

¶1627

Tentative Data

¶1628

Sl.No.	District	Total Appeared	Total shortlisted	(%)of shortlisted
1	BOKARO	27275	189	0.69
2	CHATRA	5040	40	0.79
3	DEOGHAR	15485	96	0.62
4	DHANBAD	28144	315	1.12
5	DUMKA	9706	46	0.47
6	EAST SINGHBHUM	27571	260	0.94
7	GARHWA	7009	43	0.61
8	GIRIDIH	11412	105	0.92
9	GODDA	3413	6	0.18
10	GUMLA	7227	41	0.57
11	HAZARIBAGH	26810	275	1.03
12	JAMTARA	2362	5	0.21
13	KHUNTI	6670	19	0.28
14	KODERMA	4677	12	0.26
15	LATEHAR	3605	5	0.14
16	LOHARDAGA	5904	19	0.32
17	PAKUR	4824	4	0.08
18	PALAMU	9726	119	1.22
19	RAMGARH	11739	63	0.54
20	RANCHI	60341	432	0.72
21	SAHIBGANJ	3816	12	0.31
22	SARAIKELA KHARSAWAN	9418	61	0.65
23	SIMDEGA	2787	12	0.43
24	WEST SINGHBHUM	9733	52	0.53

¶1629

Successful candidates on both dates

¶1630

Date	21.09.2024	22.09.2024	Total
Total Allocation	3,20,493	3,19,407	6,39,900
Total Appeared	1,17,666	1,87,028	3,04,694
Total successful candidates called for document verification	82	2149	2231

¶1631

¶1632

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1633

136. It appears from the above data that out of the total candidates who appeared in the examination held on 21.09.2024, 82 candidates were selected whereas out of the total candidates who appeared in the examination held on 22.09.2024, 2149

¶1634

candidates were selected.

¶1635

Number of Question & Marks

¶1636

1st Paper (Hindi & English Language) - 120 x 3 = 360 - Qualifying

¶1637

2nd Paper (Tribal & Regional Languages) - 100 x 3 = 300

¶1638

3rd Paper (GK/GS) -150 x 3 = 450

¶1639

Total Qualified in 1^st Paper - 1,24,255 (30% Slab)

¶1640

Total Qualified in all Papers - 26398 (Common Merit List)

¶1641

2^nd Paper Cut-off Marks

¶1642

Language	Minimum	Maximum
Khortha	260	300
Nagpuri	257	300
Hindi	165	248

¶1643

2^nd Paper Selection

¶1644

Sl.NO.	Language	Appeared	Qualified	Percentage (%)
1	KHORTHA	76830	1106	1.51
2	NAGPURI	40787	589	1.44
3	HINDI	120173	175	0.15
4	SANTHALI	16679	117	0.70
5	ENGLISH	23758	90	0.37

¶1645

¶1646

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1647

6	HO	5337	39	0.73
7	PANCHPARGANIA	4363	14	0.32
8	KUDUKH	3606	14	0.38
9	MUNDARI	3972	13	0.32
10	KURMALI	2759	10	0.36
11	URDU	2901	03	0.10
12	KHARIYA	462	01	0.20
13	SANSKRIT	470	00	00
14	BANGLA	2340	00	00
15	ORIYA	257	00	00
Total		3,04,694	2231

¶1648

Date wise Cut-off Marks of GS Paper

¶1649

21.09.2024

¶1650

Category	Minimum	Maximum
UR	275	402
EWS	390	402
SC	263	263
ST	-	-
EBC/BC2	278	378

¶1651

22.09.2024

¶1652

Category	Minimum	Maximum
UR	236	399
EWS	219	381
SC	208	366
ST	152	364
EBC/BC2	229	392
PH	140	-

¶1653

¶1654

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1655

Result of Claimed Centers

¶1656

Center Code	Center Name	Candidates appeared/shortlisted for Document Verification
281	Kumar B.Ed College, Dhanbad	240/4
294	UPG High School, Baliapur, Dhanbad	312/3
776	Bethany Convent High School, Makhmandro, Ratu, Ranchi	480/18
287	B.G.S. High School, Loyabad, Dhanbad	168/5

¶1657

137. Following are the key points that have emerged from the facts of the instant case, aforementioned data as well as the investigation report of the SIT with respect to the allegations levelled by the petitioners: -

¶1658

(i) No original question paper has been recovered so far, either from possession of the accused persons or from the mobile phones of the witnesses.

¶1659

(ii) The witnesses have also not claimed that they had seen any student with original question paper of the said examination. Thus, allegation of paper leak in the said examination has not yet been proved.

¶1660

(iii) There is no information about leakage of question paper so far, either from any examination center or during transit from Kolkata to the examination centers. (iv) No allegation of paper leak has been made against the

¶1661

¶1662

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1663

officials of the JSSC.

¶1664

(v) The allegation levelled by ‘Santosh Mastana’ was also not corroborated by the statement of ‘Deepika’ and her friend ‘Manish’.

¶1665

(vi) The persons who took photographs of scattered papers having answers of the questions had not taken photographs of the persons who were said to be mugging up the so-called leaked answers and thus those persons could not be identified.

¶1666

(vii) Most of the questions which were spread in the name of leaked questions were actually the previous years’ question of SCC-CGL and other examinations. As such, there is every possibility that the guess questions were spread in the name of leaked question paper(s).

¶1667

(viii) In Nepal incident also, the accused persons as well as the concerned candidates have not disclosed that they were provided the question paper(s) of the said examination, rather they were given 123 questions jotted down on a piece of paper for mugging up out of which only 66 questions were asked in the examination. Moreover, only 10 candidates out of 28 candidates, who were taken to Nepal, have been selected in the said examination and thus the selection rate is even less than 50%.

¶1668

(ix) The data of successful candidates called for document verification as has been filed by the State reflects that

¶1669

¶1670

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1671

there is no unusual spike in the number of successful candidates from any particular district or centre.

¶1672

(x) A comparison of the cut-off marks (minimum & maximum) between the ‘General Studies’ Paper asked on the 1^st date (275 - 402) with the ‘General Studies’ Paper asked on the 2^nd date (236 - 399) suggests that the cut off marks of both the dates are homogenous.

¶1673

(xi) The percentage of selected candidates for document verification from three districts is 1-1.22%, from 12 districts, it is 0.5%-0.99% and from 9 districts, it is less than 0.5%. Thus, none of the districts shows any anomalous or excessively high selection rate as all fall within the reasonable ranges.

¶1674

(xii) The petitioners have claimed that at few centres, some students were mugging up the answers of the questions which were subsequently asked in the said examination, however the result of the said centres does not show any unusual spike.

¶1675

(xiii) It is an admitted fact that the log files and time log files were not available in the mobile phones of the witnesses. No GPS co-ordinates were found in their mobile phones and even two applications under the fake GPS were found in the mobile phone of Prem Lal Thakur. The petitioners have claimed that log files were missing from the mobile phones of the witnesses due to their automatic deletion after certain interval of time. It has further been

¶1676

¶1677

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1678

claimed that the delay in lodging the FIR and belated seizure of the mobile devices by the investigating authorities may be attributed for non-availability of the log files. As regards the installation of fake GPS applications, it has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that mere existence of such applications does not indicate any tampering. Moreover, the FSL report would clearly disclose that there was no manipulation in the photographs.

¶1679

We are of the view that since the log files were missing in the mobile phones of the witnesses, it is difficult to come to a definite conclusion that the photographs were clicked by them prior to commencement of the examination. The presence of fake GPS applications in the mobile phone of the witnesses also creates doubt on the authenticity of their statements. Moreover, they had not seen original question paper booklet with respect to the said examination in the hands of any candidate, rather they had seen few candidates scribbling some questions on a piece of paper out of which some questions were asked in the examination that too were of previous years’ questions of SSC-CGL as well as other examinations.

¶1680

(xiv) The State has contended that since the online FIR was lodged in a wrong jurisdiction and the cause of action had arisen in other jurisdiction resulting in delay lodging of FIR relating to the alleged question paper leak. It has

¶1681

¶1682

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1683

further been submitted that the show cause notices have been issued to the erring officials and they have given their respective replies.

¶1684

(xv) No allegation of question paper leak has been claimed regarding the examination held on 21.09.2024.

¶1685

(xvi) Out of 824 centres, only four incidents have been reported by the petitioners regarding alleged paper leak and that too without any cogent evidence.

¶1686

(xvii) The investigation of the case is still continuing. Nonetheless, even if the claim of the petitioners that certain questions were known to few candidates is accepted to be true, the same cannot be considered as question paper leak on systemic level.

¶1687

(xviii) On both dates of the said examination, the internet service was shut down in the entire State of Jharkhand and as such, if some instance of alleged question paper leak as claimed by the petitioners is treated to be true, the same was only episodic with no evidence of widespread malpractice.

¶1688

(xix) So far as the incident of Nepal is concerned, all the tainted candidates have been identified and they can appropriately be segregated from the untainted candidates.

¶1689

(xx) The petitioners have not been able to show that the sanctity of the said examination was compromised at systemic level.

¶1690

¶1691

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1692

(xxi) Till date, the investigation of SIT does not reveal systemic paper leak and widespread malpractice.

¶1693

(xxii) The learned senior counsel for the writ petitioners have argued that in the examination held on 21.09.2024 having candidates of ‘Hindi Language’ paper, only 82 candidates out of 1,17,666 were selected for document verification whereas in the examination held on 22.09.2024 having candidates of other regional languages, number of selected candidates were 2149. The said argument of the learned senior counsel for the petitioners has been satisfactorily answered by the learned Advocate General as well as counsel for the intervenors that such spike of successful candidates in the examination held on 22.09.2024 was only due to the reason that regional language papers were high scoring as compared to the ‘Hindi Language’ paper. Moreover, the higher selection of the successful candidates has been made only in ‘Nagpuri’ and ‘Khortha’ languages.

¶1694

138. In view of the aforesaid reasons, we are of the considered view that in the present case, there is no sufficient ground for cancellation of the process of the said examination.

¶1695

139. Learned senior counsel for the writ petitioners by referring to the Jharkhand Competitive Examination (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023 submit that the primary objective of the said Act is to prohibit the use of unfair means in any competitive examination.

¶1696

¶1697

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1698

140. It is also submitted that Section 2(1)(g)(1) and (2) of the Act, 2023 provide an expansive interpretation of what constitutes "unfair means." Section 2(1)(g)(1) includes within its ambit of “Unfair Means” the act of taking any "unfair aid, other unauthorized aid" or using any unauthorized electronic or mechanical device or gadget etc. by an examinee in the computer based examinations. Further, Section 2(1)(g)2(i) expressly encompasses within the scope of unfair means the act of “impersonation” or “leakage" or "attempt for leakage" or "conspiracy for leakage" of question paper by a person, whereas Section 2(1)(g)(2)(iv) covers any act with respect to "direct or indirect assistance” by a person to the examinee in an unauthorized manner in the competitive examination. Therefore, obtaining or utilizing leaked answer keys in connection with a competitive examination squarely falls within the ambit of "unfair means" as defined under Section 2(1)(g) of the Act, 2023. Such conduct is expressly prohibited under Section 4 of the Act, 2023 and attracts penalties under Section 12 of the said Act. The expressions used in the statute must be interpreted in a purposive and liberal manner to advance the legislative intent, rather than adopting a narrow or literal construction.

¶1699

141. On the other hand, the learned Advocate General submits that section 7 of the Act, 2023 only talks about preventing any unauthorized person to receive or attempt to receive or have possession of such question paper or answer sheet or Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) sheet or any part or copy thereof in any

¶1700

¶1701

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1702

manner. Hence, alleged possession of piece of paper containing some questions/answers would not come under the ambit of the said section of the Act, 2023.

¶1703

142. We do not want to delve into the said issue in view of the fact that the FIR has already been lodged in this matter and few accused persons have also been arrested the investigation of which is still continuing. If any person is found violating the provisions of the Act, 2023 attracting criminal culpability, he/she will be proceeded with accordingly by the competent criminal court.

¶1704

Argument qua sending the investigation of the alleged paper leak in the said examination to the C.B.I.

¶1705

143. Mr. Gopal Shankarnarayanan, learned Senior Counsel for the intervenors submits that in the instant Public Interest Litigation, the petitioners have made a prayer for issuance of direction for court monitored investigation by a SIT with respect to the incident of alleged question paper leak in the said examination and the grievance of the petitioners has been redressed as the investigation by the duly constituted SIT is going on.

¶1706

144. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of some of the intervenors, refutes the claim of the petitioners with respect to sending the matter to the CBI by putting reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Legislative Council, U.P, Lucknow Vs. Sushil Kumar reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2254 wherein it has been held that only in very exceptional cases, where the integrity of the

¶1707

¶1708

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1709

process or investigation has been compromised and there exists prima facie material to indicate that the entire investigation is tainted, an order for transfer of investigation to the CBI can be passed. Such an extraordinary power is not to be exercised as a matter of routine merely because a party has levelled certain allegations against the local police without credible supporting evidence.

¶1710

145. It is submitted that no such case is made out in the present case and the allegations levelled are bald, vague, and speculative.

¶1711

146. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners of W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024, submits that the prayers made in the present Public Interest Litigation must be read in their entirety and not in isolation. While the petitioners have sought constitution of a Court- monitored SIT, that request necessarily stems from the acknowledged failure of the existing SIT which has been constituted and re-constituted repeatedly at the discretion of the State without transparency or judicial sanction. Such arbitrary restructuring of the investigative mechanism has eroded both the credibility and continuity of the investigation, defeating the very objective of impartial investigation.

¶1712

147. It is further contended that CBI investigation has been specifically prayed for in W.P.(C) No. 1476 of 2025, and the said demand is reiterated and emphasized in the present PIL.

¶1713

148. It is also contended that the ongoing investigation conducted by the SIT has failed to inspire confidence or yield

¶1714

¶1715

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1716

substantive results despite passage of several months. In the present facts and circumstances, continued retention of the probe within the hands of the same administrative apparatus would only perpetuate delay and diminish evidentiary value.

¶1717

149. It is further contended that a timely transfer of the investigation is therefore imperative not only to preserve the integrity of the evidence, but also to restore public faith in fairness of the entire examination process.

¶1718

150. Learned senior counsel for the said petitioners puts reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pooja Pal Vs. Union of India and Others reported in (2016) 3 SCC 135 . In the said case, Their Lordships have held that the extraordinary power of the constitutional courts under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution of India qua the issuance of direction to CBI for conducting investigation must be exercised with great caution. It has further been held that although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down in this regard, however such an order cannot be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. The extraordinary power under the said Articles can be invoked in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instill confidence in investigation or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and for enforcing the fundamental rights.

¶1719

151. It is thus well settled principle of law that the

¶1720

¶1721

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1722

investigation of a matter cannot be referred to CBI in routine manner, rather the same is ordered only in very exceptional cases where the integrity of the process or investigation has been compromised and there exists prima facie material to indicate that the entire investigation is tainted.

¶1723

152. In the case in hand, though the petitioners have claimed that the investigation of SIT has been compromised, however they have not been able to substantiate the said claim by bringing on record sufficient material. The petitioners have failed to show that the investigation of SIT is tainted and thus we do not find any reason to refer the present matter to CBI for investigation. On mere ground that the constitution of SIT was changed on few occasions is not sufficient to suggest that the investigation being made by SIT is defective. One of the allegations of the petitioners is that the material evidence furnished by the public has been ignored by the SIT. However, it is evident from the record that the evidences furnished by the public have been duly considered by the SIT. Moreover, some evidences have been found false and rest are under investigation.

¶1724

153. In view of the aforesaid discussions, we deem it appropriate to pass the following directions: -

¶1725

(i) The status quo granted by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2024 passed in W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024 is hereby vacated.

¶1726

(ii) The respondent-JSSC is directed to publish the final result of the said examination and the State

¶1727

¶1728

2025:JHHC:36194-DB

¶1729

Government is further directed to appoint the successful candidates on the respective posts.

¶1730

(iii) The SIT is directed to complete the investigation of the case within six months from the date of passing of the present judgement.

¶1731

(iv) Out of 28 candidates who were allegedly taken to Nepal for mugging up the questions/answers, 10 were called for document verification and as such the final result of the said 10 candidates will be kept in abeyance till the investigation of SIT is completed as well as their

¶1732

selection will be subject to the final outcome of the investigation.

¶1733

(v) If in the investigation of SIT, some more successful candidates are found involved in malpractice, the State shall take appropriate action against the said candidates.

¶1734

154. The writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid directions.

¶1735

155. The pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶1736

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.)

¶1737

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶1738

December 03, 2025 Ritesh/A.F.R. Uploaded on 03.12.2025

¶1739

Manish Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samra Manjhi And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Punulal Mahra And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Dinesh Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anant Kumar Paswan Vs the Steel Authority of India Limited through Its Managing Director Cum Chief Executive Officer

Rama Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

The Chartered Accountants Act 1949 And Ors. Vs Shri Basu Deo Shah