Manjula Palit Vs State of Jharkhand

¶1

2025:JHHC:30680

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(S) No. 4070 of 2019

¶4

Kanta Bishwakarma, aged about 59 yrs, Wife of Vijay Kumar Sharma, resident of-DSP Road, Baraik Mohalla, P.Ο. & P.S.-Gumla, Dist- Gumla, Jharkhand.

¶5

Mary Aruna Anima Toppo, aged about 56 years, Wife of Simon Marandi, Resident of-Loyla Nagar, Sisai Road, P.O., P.S & Dist- Gumla, Jharkhand

¶6

Sushma Tirkey, Aged about- 54 years, Wife of Subash Bhagat, Resident of-Tangratoli, Piskamore, P.O.-Hehal, P.S.-Sukhdeonagar, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand ... … Petitioner(s)

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Jharkhand,

¶9

The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, at FFP Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶10

The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, at New Secretariat Building, Beilly Road, P.O. & P.S. Beilly Road, Dist.- Patna, Bihar.

¶11

The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Gumla, P.O. & P.S. Gumla, Dist. Gumla, Jharkhand.

¶12

Department of Finance and Planning, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, HEC Colony, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶13

Accountant General (A&E), having its office at Shyamli, P.O. & P.S.Doranda, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand .... … Respondent(s)

¶14

With

¶15

W.P.(S) No. 2154 of 2021

¶16

1 MANJULA PALIT, aged about 61 years W/O Shri Shiv Kumar Jha, By Caste-Sanatan (Hindu), By Occupation-Retired, R/O- Neori More Vikas, P.O.-Vikas Vidyalaya, P.S.-Sadar, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶17

MUNNI KACHHAP, aged about 61 years, W/O Jhari Kachhap, By Caste-Adivasi, By Occupation-Retired, R/O-Bara Ghagra, PO+PSDoranda, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶18

Mr. SRINIWAS (Nominee and husband) of KANAK KUMARI (Retired and expired Lady Extention Officer), aged about 68 years, By Caste-Sanatan (Hindu), By Occupation-Retired, R/O-Sarvoday Nagar, Dam Site, P.O-Ranchi University, P.S.-Gonda District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. (True copy of Acknowledgement of Death report and Shirsh

¶19

1

¶20

2025:JHHC:30680

¶21

Shaiya Ticket both from RIMS, Ranchi attached herewith).

¶22

PRAMODINI TOPPO, aged about 60 years, W/O Ajit Tigga, By Caste-Adivasi, By Occupation-Service, R/O-Kadru Kumhartoli, P.O. P.S.-Ashok Nagar, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand going to retire on 30^th day of Month June of 2021 ... … Petitioner(s)

¶23

Versus

¶24

State Of Jharkhand.

¶25

The Chief Secretary. Government Of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O.+P.S.-Dhurwa, District- Ranchi

¶26

The Principal Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa P.O+PS-Dhurwa, DistrictRanchi, Jharkhand.

¶27

The Principal Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O.+PS-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶28

The Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi, PO+PSRanchi, District-Ranchi.

¶29

The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, Khuti, Simdega, PO-GPO, Ranchi, Khuti Simdega, PS- Kotwali Ranchi, Khuti, Simdega

¶30

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Ranchi, Khuti, Simdega PO-GPO, RANCHI, KHUTI, SIMDEGA, PS-KOTWALI, RANCHI, KHUTI, SIMDEGA

¶31

The Managing Director, District Rural Development Agency (D.R.D.A.), Ranchi, Khuti, Simdega, PO-GPO, Ranchi, Khuti, Simdega, PS-Kotwali Ranchi, Khuti, Simdega

¶32

The Block Development Officer, Ormanjhi, Torpa, Ratu, Kurdeg PO-Ormanjhi, Torpa, Ratu, Kurdeg, PS-Ormanjhi, Torpa, Kurdeg, Ratu

¶33

.... … Respondent(s)

¶34

With

¶35

W.P.(S) No. 2396 of 2022

¶36

Anita Kumari, aged about 61 years, wife of Bimlendu Kumar, resident of House No. 128 Saral Man, Ward No. 14, Sishir Kumar Ghosh Road, Purandaha, P.O. Deoghar, P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar (Jharkhand).

¶37

Meera Kumari, aged about 60 years, wife of Ratan Kumar Jha, resident of Ward No. 10, Satyanagar, P.O. Godda, P.S. Godda, District Godda (Jharkhand). ... … Petitioner(s)

¶38

Versus

¶39

The State of Jharkhand, through the Principal Secretary, Finance Department, having its office at Project Building, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S.

¶40

2

¶41

2025:JHHC:30680

¶42

Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶43

Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶44

District Rural Development Agency, Deoghar, P.O. Deoghar, P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar (Jharkhand).

¶45

Development Commissioner, Deoghar, P.O. Deoghar, P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar (Jharkhand).

¶46

Deputy Development Commissioner, Deoghar, P.O. Deoghar, P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar (Jharkhand) .... … Respondent(s)

¶47

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶48

For the Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate Mr. Harsh Chandra, Advocate Mr. Shashank Kumar, Advocate Mr. Saif Ali Ansari, Advocate [in W.P.(S) No. 4070 of 2019] Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Arpan Mishra, Advocate Mr. Kashish Tiwary, Advocate [in W.P.(S) No. 2396 of 2022]
For the State of Bihar	: Mr. Ranjit Kumar, AC to GA, Bihar [in W.P.(S) Nos. 4070 of 2019 & 2396 of 2022]
For the Accountant General	: Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Advocate [in W.P.(S) No. 4070 of 2019]
For the State of Jharkhand	: Ms. Rishi Bharati, AC to AAG-III [in W.P.(S) No. 2396 of 2022] Ms. Nirupama, AC to Sr. SC-II

¶49

¶50

Order No. 14 /Dated: 23^rd September 2025

¶51

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶52

2. Since common issues are involved in all these writ applications, as such with the consent of the parties, all are heard together and being disposed of by this common order.

¶53

3. In W.P.(S) No. 4070 of 2019, the petitioners have made

¶54

following prayers:

¶55

“1. a) For quashing of the memo no.-5298 dated 18.10.2017 (Annexure-9) so far as it affects the petitioner whereby it was held that the Lady Extension Officers being contractual Employees are not entitled for the benefits of 7^th pay commission.

¶56

b) For issuance of direction upon the respondents to consider and grant the benefits of M.А.С.Р. and 7^th pay revision to the petitioners as is available to other government employees.

¶57

3

¶58

2025:JHHC:30680

¶59

c) For holding and declaring that the petitioners being Lady Extension Officer posted in different blocks in Gumla District and appointed prior to year 2004 are entitled for getting their retiral dues particularly under the heads of pension, Gratuity and Leave Encashment.

¶60

d) For issuance of a direction upon the respondents to act in the light of their own circular issued vide letter no. 79 dated 24.02.2003 (Annexure-11) and take necessary steps to ensure payment of retiral dues of the petitioner no.-1 who have rendered unblemished services for more than 30 years but till date no steps have been taken in this regard.

¶61

AND/OR

¶62

e) For any other appropriate relief (s), for which the petitioner may be found entitled in law and equity.”

¶63

4. In W.P.(S) No. 2154 of 2021, the petitioners have made

¶64

following prayers :

¶65

“1. To issue appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions in the nature of natural certiorari for the benefits of superannuation (Pension) after the regular service of more than 30 years in the same post as by taking Bihar Pension Rule 1950 of rule 59, applicable for the state of Jharkhand after the bifurcation in the terms of State Reorganization Act. ...

¶66

2. For further direction the petitioners also hold the statutory provisions of Jharkhand Pension Rule. ...

¶67

3. For further directions the petitioners also hold General Provident Fund as applicable for this post.

¶68

4. For further direction to issue gratuity benefits as it is applicable for the employee after the service in same and regular service of 6 months (120 days) only, but, in this situation petitioners were serving in same and regular service for more than 30 years. The petitioners are entitled to get this benefit in the eyes of Justice also, in the welfare State as Jharkhand.”

¶69

5. In W.P.(S) No. 2396 of 2022, the petitioners have made

¶70

following prayers:

¶71

“1.(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, for quashing the office order as contained in Memo No. 646, dated 03.02.2011 (Annexure-13) issued by the Special Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, whereby and whereunder a decision has been taken that Lady Extension Officer are not Government Servants.

¶72

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the Departmental Letter No. 1845, dated 16.05.2018 (Annexure-14) issued by the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, whereby and whereunder a decision has been taken regarding the service condition of Lady Extension Officer to the extent that the petitioners will not be entitled for ACP, MACP, Pension, Gratuity and Leave Encashment. (iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction upon the respondents to forthwith release Pension, Gratuity, Leave Encashment.

¶73

And/Or

¶74

(iv) For any other writ / order / direction as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper for doing conscionable justice to the petitioner.”

¶75

6. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners draws

¶76

4

¶77

2025:JHHC:30680

¶78

attention of this Court towards order dated 19.05.2023 passed in W.P.(S) 6042 of 2015 and analogous cases and submits that the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has already quashed the order challenged in the instant writ applications and, accordingly, the issue raised by these petitioners in the instant writ applications has been settled by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court .

¶79

7. Learned counsel for the respondent-State could not dispute the fact that the order which is assailed in these writ applications has already been quashed in the above referred case; however, she submits that the review application has been filed but fairly admits that no stay has been granted in the said review application.

¶80

8. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, all these writ petitions, are hereby, disposed of on the same reasoning and findings, what has been given by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No. 6042 of 2015 and analogous cases .

¶81

As a result, the impugned orders are hereby quashed and set aside. The benefit which has been extended to the petitioners in W.P.(S) 6042 of 2015 and analogous cases shall also be given to present petitioners also .

¶82

9. It goes without saying that since these writ applications have been disposed of in the line of the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 6042 of 2015 and analogous cases ; as such, any subsequent order which might be passed in review application in future will affect the Petitioners of these writ applications also and they will be guided by the said subsequent order in future, if any.

¶83

10. Pending I.As, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶84

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶85

23.09.2025

¶86

Amit

¶87

5

Manjula Palit v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjula Palit v. 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

Afsana Khatoon Vs State of Jharkhand

Baidya Nath Pathak Vs Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited Through Its The Managing Director And Ors.

Rekha Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ram Prasad Hazari Vs Education

Shiv Charan Bhogta Vs State of Jharkhand through Secretary Rural Development Dept

Shrinwas Singh and Ors. Vs Water Resources Department