Joyanaz Bano Vs Union of India through Indian Statistical Institute, an Autonomous Institute

Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:11284-DB )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

L.P.A. No. 466 of 2025

Joyanaz Bano, daughter of Md. Shahzad, resident of Shastri Nagar, Giridih, PO & PS: Giridih, District: Giridih. ... Petitioner/ Appellant

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

Union of India through Indian Statistical Institute, an autonomous Institute, having its Head Office at 203, B.T. Road, PO & PS: Barrackpor District: 24 Pargana, Kolkata-700 108 (West Bengal); 2. Director, Indian Statistical Institute at: 203, B.T. Road, PO & PS: Barrackpor, District: 24 Pargana, Kolkata-700 108 (West Bengal); 3. Chief Executive (Administration and Finance) Indian Statistical Institute, at: 203, B.T. Road, PO & PS: Barrackpor, District: 24 Pargana, Kolkata700 108 (West Bengal);

¶7

In-Charge, Indian Statistical Institute, Giridih, Rose Villa, New Barganda, PO & PS: Giridih, District: Giridih.

¶8

…… Respondents/ Respondents

¶9

CORAM :- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶10

For the Appellant : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, DSGI

¶11

08/ 15.04.2026

¶12

Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India.

¶13

This appeal is directed against the order dated 10.09.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 3826 of 2023, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for quashing of the order dated 06.06.2023, passed by the respondent no.3 has been rejected.

¶14

The fact in brief is that pursuant to the advertisement dated 12.01.2015 the writ petitioner (appellant herein) had applied for the post of Assistant Cook in the Indian Statistical Institute. The petitioner was duly selected in the interview and on the basis of the recommendation of the Selection Committee with approval of the respondent no.2 an office order bearing Office Order No.191 dated 23.03.2015 was issued, by virtue of which the petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant Cook on a consolidated pay of Rs.12,000/per month. After the petitioner was declared medically and physically fit she had submitted a joining report on 25.03.2015 which was duly accepted by the respondent no.4. Vide office order issued under Memo No.1112 dated

¶15

1

¶16

L.P.A. No. 466 of 2025

¶17

18.03.2016 the respondent no.3 had extended the services of eight employees including the petitioner for a period of one year on a consolidated pay of Rs.13,200/- per month. There have been successive orders of extending the services of the petitioner. It has been stated in the writ petition that without any notice/ termination the petitioner was informed vide letter no.7 dated 14.09.2020 of her being selected as a Skilled Cook in Dronacharya Seva Sansthan Project at the Indian Statistical Institute, Rose Villa, Giridih on a gross payment of Rs.16,600/- per month w.e.f. 01.10.2020. The petitioner being aggrieved with the letter dated 14.09.2020 had represented the authorities to take work from her in the post of Cook directly and not through an agency but the same did not evoke any response and ultimately the petitioner under protest had joined the agency. The petitioner being constrained with the inaction of the respondents preferred a writ application being W.P.(S) No.3329 of 2020 which was disposed of on 13.04.2023 directing the petitioner to submit a representation and the respondents were directed to pass a reasoned order on the same taking into consideration the judgment passed in W.P.A. No. 692/22 (Sri Alok Singh & others versus Indian Statistical Institute & others). The petitioner had accordingly made a representation before the respondent no.2 and vide order dated 06.06.2023 the said representation was rejected. Being aggrieved with the rejection of the representation the petitioner preferred a writ application being W.P.(S) No. 3826 of 2023 which however was dismissed on 10.09.2024 by the learned Single Judge and which is the order impugned to this appeal.

¶18

It has been submitted by Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/ appellant that the petitioner had put in continuous service from 2015 and the petitioner should have been regularized on the said post. It has been submitted that the judgment passed by the Calcutta High Court in W.P.A. No. 692/22 has not at all been appreciated by the learned Single Judge. The mala fide of the respondents would be evident from the fact that the respondents have got the petitioner employed through an agency by which her salary has been reduced and an impediment has been created in the regularization of the services of the petitioner.

¶19

Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India has supported the impugned order dated 10.09.2024 while submitting that the petitioner was appointed on a contractual basis and no right accrues to the petitioner for regularization. It has been submitted that since certain services were outsourced the petitioner was appointed as a Skilled Cook in the

¶20

2

¶21

L.P.A. No. 466 of 2025

¶22

outsourced agency and therefore, the representation of the petitioner was rightly rejected by the concerned respondent. The learned Single Judge has also rightly not interfered in the letter dated 06.06.2023 as the same reflects the policy decision of the respondent-Indian Statistical Institute.

¶23

We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also perused the affidavits on record. 7. The initial order of appointment of the petitioner as contained in office order dated 23.03.2015 reflects the status of such appointment as purely contractual in nature with a consolidated pay of Rs.12,000/- per month. The contract was renewed/ extended on several occasions. The petitioner had accepted all the terms and conditions enumerated in the initial order of appointment and the subsequent extensions of the contract. It appears from the reasoned order dated 06.06.2023 that the internal outsourcing committee of the Indian Statistical Institute had recommended for outsourcing of services at ISI, Giridih, consequent to which M/s Dronacharya Seva Sansthan was selected as the outsourcing agency. It also appears that the existing workers of the Branch including the petitioner were engaged by the outsourced agency. The petitioner had accepted such appointment and it also seems that ISI has ensured that the minimum wages at statutory rates are being paid to the petitioner by the outsourced agency. The petitioner being initially appointed as a contractual employee by the ISI and subsequently being appointed as a contractual employee in the outsourced agency does not by any source of imagination gives her a vested right to be regularized. The petitioner also does not have a right to be claiming service on direct contract with the ISI in the teeth of the decision taken by the ISI to outsource its manpower requirement to an outside agency. The learned Single Judge having considered all aspects of the case had rightly dismissed the writ application and there being no reason to conclude otherwise, this Letters Patent Appeal stands dismissed as well.

¶24

Pending I.A., if any, stands closed.

¶25

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)

¶26

(PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.)

¶27

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi, Dated: 15.04.2026 S.B. Uploaded on 18.04.2026

¶28

L.P.A. No. 466 of 2025

Joyanaz Bano v. Union of India through Indian Statistical Institute, an Autonomous Institute

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joyanaz Bano v. Union of India through Indian Statistical Institute, an Autonomous Institute

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Azharuddin Ansari Alias Shahrukh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Xxx Vs State of Jharkhand

Krishna Yadav @ Sultan Ji Vs State of Jharkhand

X Vs State of Jharkhand

Victim Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pintu Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand