Nupur Nalini Bhagat Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

2026:JHHC:2181

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.161 of 2023

------

Nupur Nalini Bhagat, wife of Shri Sunil Oraon, resident of Flat No.201B, Lotus Apartment, P.O. & P.S. Bariatu, District Ranchi, Jharkhand, presently posted as Assistant Settlement Officer, Ranchi, P.O., P.S. & District Ranchi. … … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶8

The Joint Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶9

The Deputy Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶10

… … Respondents

¶11

------

¶12

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶13

------

¶14

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sumit Prakash, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Mr. Niraj Kumar Mishra, AC to GP-IV

¶15

------

¶16

05/ 28.01.2026

¶17

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for

¶18

the following reliefs:-

¶19

“(a) For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) for commanding upon the respondents to consider and grant promotion to the Petitioner on the post of Sub-Divisional Officer and equivalent grade in the Unrevised Pay Scale of Rs.15600-39100 with Grade Pay Rs.6,600/- (Revised Pay Scale : Pay Matrix – Level-11) from basic and equivalent grade of Unrevised Pay Scale Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay Rs.5400/- (Revised Pay Scale :Pay Matrix-Level-09) with all consequential benefits with effect from 24.12.2020 i.e. the date on which the juniors to the Petitioner have been

¶20

1

¶21

2026:JHHC:2181

¶22

granted promotion by the 1^st Departmental Promotion Committee held on 24.12.2020, the Petitioner though having been eligible for promotion has been discriminated in the grant of promotion citing the reason that updated ACR was not available at the time of 1^st Departmental Promotion Committee.

¶23

And / Or

¶24

(b) The Petitioner further prays for issuance of further appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) commanding upon the respondents who have granted promotion to the Petitioner from 14.12.2022 i.e. the date on which 2^nd Departmental Promotion Committee was held while ignoring the fact that the Petitioner was eligible for promotion on 24.12.2020 i.e. the date of 1^st Departmental Promotion Committee, when the juniors to the Petitioners have been promoted.”

¶25

2. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents.

¶26

3. It is the case of the petitioner that her case was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), but promotion was not granted on the ground that the updated ACR was not available before the Committee at that point of time. It is an admitted case of the petitioner that the petitioner later on was granted promotion on 14.12.2022, however her juniors were promoted on 24.12.2020. The reason for not granting promotion is non-est in the eyes of law, thus the petitioner wants that her promotion should be granted w.e.f. 24.12.2020.

¶27

4. The respondents in their counter affidavit at para-14,

¶28

2

¶29

2026:JHHC:2181

¶30

have stated that out of five years’ Performance Appraisal Report, records of only 46 months 11 days were available at the time of the Departmental Promotion Committee Meeting, which was held on 24.12.2020, thus the petitioner was not granted the promotion in the year 2020.

¶31

5. From the facts narrated in the pleadings, it is clear that due to non-availability of the entire ACR, the case of the petitioner was not considered by the DPC on 24.12.2020. These latches cannot be attributed to the petitioner. Respondents should have collected all the materials before considering promotion.

¶32

6. Thus, I direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner to grant her promotion from the date on which her juniors were promoted and restore her seniority.

¶33

6.1. Necessary orders considering the case of the petitioner should be passed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶34

6.2. If the case of the petitioner needs to be placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee, the same should also be placed by constituting a special Committee for the aforesaid purpose with all the records.

¶35

7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of .

¶36

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶37

28^th January, 2026 Prashant. Cp-2

¶38

Uploaded on 31.01.2026

¶39

3

Nupur Nalini Bhagat v. the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nupur Nalini Bhagat v. the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Das Vs the Chairman Cum Managing Director Central Coalfields Limited

Ansu Kujur Alias Kumari Ansu Kujur Vs Union of India, Thro Secretary, Ministry of Textile, Govt. of India

Dewanti Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Colonel Praveen Kumar (Retd) Vs the State of Jharkhand

Binod Narayan Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dr. Md. Sakur Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand