Dismissed¶20

Sunita Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Civil Review – Withdrawal – Application dismissed as withdrawn with liberty

Jharkhand HC8 May 2026C.Rev./2/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sunita Devi v. State of Jharkhand and others (including BCCL and CMPFO officials), Civil Review No. 02 of 2024, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, decided on 8th May, 2026 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad. Counsel for the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the review application with liberty to pursue available remedies; the Court dismissed the application as withdrawn with that liberty and disposed of it. No issues were framed, no statutes or precedents were cited, and no quantum was awarded.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw granted; application dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to ventilate the grievance by searching out the remedy. ¶20

Sunita Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:14144

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Review No. 02 of 2024

¶3

Sunita Devi, aged about 47 years, W/o Late Laxmi Narayan Singh, resident of Qr. No. M-19, Sudamdih Main Colony, P.O. – Sudamdih, P.S. Sudamdih, Distrcit – Dhanbad

¶4

... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand;

¶7

P.V.K.R. Malika Arjun Rao, son of not known to the petitioner, Director (Personnel), Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Koula Bhawan, P.O. – Koyla Nagar, P.S. – Sariadhella, District – Dhanbad, Jharkhand;

¶8

Sahdeo Maji, son of not known to the petitioner, Project Officer, Patherdih Colliery, Eastern Jharia Area, Bharat Coking Coal Limited P.O. and P.S. Patherdih, District – Dhanbad, Jharkhand;

¶9

Animesh Bharti, son of not known to the petitioner, Regional Commissioner, Cola Mines Provident Fund, P.O., P.S. and District – Dhanbad, Jharkhand ... Opp. Parties

¶10

... Opp. Parties

¶11

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

¶12

------

¶13

For the Petitioner	: Mr. Amrendra Pradhan, Advocate
For the CMPFO	: Mr. Prashant Kr. Singh, Advocate
	: Mr. Karbir, Advocate
For the BCCL	: Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate ------

¶14

09/Dated: 8^th May, 2026

¶15

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after some argument, seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the present application with a liberty to ventilate his grievance by searching out the remedy.

¶16

2. Such submission has been made in the presence of the learned

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

2026:JHHC:14144

¶19

counsel appearing for the opposite parties.

¶20

3. As such, the instant application being Civil Review No. 02 of 2024 is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, and as such disposed of.

¶21

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶22

8^th May, 2026 Samarth

¶23

Page 2 of 2

Sunita Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunita Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhwinder Kaur Vs Education

Om Hari Choubey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arun And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Shanti Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dinesh Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Yogendra Prasad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand