Disposed

Binay Kumar v. State of Jharkhand through Secretary Department of Agriculture Cooperation and Farmers Welfare

Jharkhand HC14 Sept 2026WPC/1941/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an agricultural department employee, sought mandamus for outstanding salary, continued salary pending formal disengagement, and service regularization under central government agricultural schemes. The court disposed of the writ petition without deciding merits, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before Respondent No.2, who must issue a reasoned speaking order within eight weeks and implement any favourable order within four additional weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file fresh representation before Respondent No.2; Respondent No.2 to decide with reasoned speaking order within 8 weeks of receipt; consequential benefits to be extended within 4 weeks if order favors petitioner.

Binay Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand through… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:27685

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P. (S) No. 1941 of 2020

¶4

Binay Kumar S/o Sri Sukh Lal aged about 48 years, R/O Quarter No. DT-1921, Post Office and Police Station – Dhurwa, District – Ranchi. ...... Petitioner(s)

¶5

...... Petitioner(s)

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Jharkhand, through Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare, Nepal House, PO+PS- Doranda, District – Ranchi.

¶8

The Director, Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, Kanke Road, PO+PSKanke, District – Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s)

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶10

¶11

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anup Kumar Agarwal, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Kumar Pawan, AC to SC (Mines)-II

¶12

05/Dated:-14.09.2026

¶13

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for the following reliefs:

¶15

“a. For a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the outstanding salary of the petitioner 285948.00 with interest.

¶16

b. For a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to pay the salary of the petitioner till date as the petitioner has not been communicated for his disengagement till date by the respondent.

¶17

c. For a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents authority to consider the claim of the petitioner for his service regularization under the schemes namely N.M.S.A. (National Mission for Sustainable Mission for Sustainable Agriculture) and Ν.Μ.Α.Ε.Τ. (National Mission for Agricultural Extension and Technology) or against any other post.”

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner is fully entitled for the prayer made in the instant writ application; however, in spite of several representations, the grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed.

¶19

4. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that since no counter affidavit has been filed; as such the petitioner may be directed to approach the concerned respondent by filing a

¶20

¶21

2026:JHHC:27685

¶22

fresh representation, who shall look into the matter so that the grievance of the petitioner can be redressed.

¶23

5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions and without going into the merits of the case, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with all supporting documents before the respondent No.2. The moment the respondent No.2 will receive such representation, he shall look into the grievance of the petitioner and take a decision in the matter in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 08 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation and communicate the same to the petitioner. If the order is passed in favour of the petitioner, all consequential benefits shall be extended to the petitioner within a further period of 04 weeks.

¶24

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

¶25

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶26

SEPTEMBER 14^th , 2026 Simran/Uploaded- 19.09.2026

¶27

Binay Kumar v. State of Jharkhand through Secretary Department of Agriculture Cooperation and Farmers Welfare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binay Kumar v. State of Jharkhand through Secretary Department of Agriculture Cooperation and Farmers Welfare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases