Md. Arif, the Secretary, Brilliant Education Trust v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Nov 2025WPC/6059/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; W.P.(C) No. 6059 of 2025; Md. Arif (through Secretary, Brilliant Education Trust) v. State of Jharkhand, Deputy Commissioner Bokaro, Administrator-cum-Additional Municipal Commissioner Chas Municipal Corporation, Branch Manager Bank of India Chas Branch, Branch Manager Union Bank of India Chas Branch; writ petition withdrawn at threshold; dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach competent authority; bench: Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar; decided 11 November 2025; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ petition permitted, with liberty to approach the competent authority. ¶24-25

Md. Arif, the Secretary, Brilliant Education Trust Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

 2025:JHHC:33588-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 6059 of 2025

¶3

Md. Arif, S/o Md. Karim, R/o Sultannagar, Chas, PO & PS-Chas, District-Bokaro, through the Secretary, Brilliant Education Trust

¶4

... … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

The Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro

¶8

The Administrator-cum-Additional Municipal Commissioner, Chas Municipal Corporation, Bokaro

¶9

The Branch Manager, Bank of India, Chas Branch, Bokaro

¶10

The Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Chas Branch, Bokaro

¶11

Respondents

¶12

¶13

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶15

¶16

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr. J.F. Toppo, GA-V For the Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Anup Kumar Agarwal, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate

¶17

Mr. Shivam Singh, Advocate

¶18

¶19

02/11.11.2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for

¶20

some time, prays for withdrawal of the instant writ petition with

¶21

liberty to approach the competent authority.

¶22

2. The prayer being innocuous and moreover being made

¶23

at the threshold is allowed.

¶24

3. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as

¶25

withdrawn with aforesaid liberty.

¶26

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.)

¶27

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶28

November 11, 2025 Manish/Ritesh

¶29

Md. Arif, the Secretary, Brilliant Education Trust v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Arif, the Secretary, Brilliant Education Trust 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand Vs Devendra Kumar Sinha

Raj Kumar Agrawal Vs Union of India, through Its Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions

Gaurav Kumar Prasad Vs the Chief Secretary Government of Jharkhand

The State of Jharkhand Thr the Secretary/ Pr. Secretary, Personel, Admin. Reforms N Rajbhasha Dept. Vs Akhilesh Prasad

Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd., through Its Chief Executive Officer, Kanchan Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Dept. of Mines and Geology

Nu-Horizen Metchem Pvt. Ltd, Thro Its Chief Executive Officer Cum Director, Adarsh Kumar Agrawal Vs Union of India, National Public Procurement Portal-Government E-Market Place, Thr Its Secretary