Disposed¶24

Vikash Kumar Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC8 Jan 2026WPC/2726/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court writ petition (W.P.(C) No.2726 of 2024, Vikash Kumar Sharma v. State of Jharkhand and others, including Secretaries of Finance, Women & Child Development and Health Departments, CMO Koderma and Director RIMS) disposed of as infructuous on 08.01.2026 by Justice Rajesh Kumar after counsel reported the claim had already been satisfied; respondents concurred; no statute or precedent case cited; no quantum.

What did the court decide?

None granted by this Court; counsel for the petitioner reported that the claim raised in the writ petition had already been satisfied and the petition was disposed of as infructuous. ¶24

Vikash Kumar Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:366

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

(Civil Writ Jurisdiction)

¶4

W.P. (C) No.2726 of 2024

¶5

¶6

Vikash Kumar Sharma, son of Late Baleshwar Sharma, aged about 37 years resident of Taratand, Ward no.14, P.O.& P.S. Jhumritilaiya, District Koderma. …. …. Petitioner(s)

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. The State of Jharkhand

¶9

2. Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Jharkhand, Dhurwa, P.O.-Dhurwa, P.S.-Jagarnathpur, District-Ranchi.

¶10

3. Secretary, Department of Women, Child Development & Social Security, Government of Jharkhand, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District-Ranchi.

¶11

4. Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education & Family Welfare, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District-Ranchi.

¶12

5. Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District-Ranchi.

¶13

6. Under Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education & Family Welfare, Dhurwa, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi.

¶14

7. Deputy Commissioner, Koderma, P.O., P.S. & District-Koderma.

¶15

8. Chief Medical Officer, Sadar Hospital, Koderma, P.O., P.S. & District Koderma.

¶16

9. The Director, Rajendra Institute of Medical Science, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Bariatu, District-Ranchi. …. …. Respondent(s)

¶17

¶18

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶19

---For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Kr. Mahatha, Adv. For the State : Mr. Vineet Prakash, A.C. to S.C.-IV For the RIMS : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Adv. ----

¶20

12/Dated: 08^th January, 2026

¶21

1. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the claim raised in the present writ petition has already been satisfied and he has instruction not to pursue the present case as it has become infructuous.

¶22

2026:JHHC:366

¶23

2. Learned counsel for the respondents have supported the submission of the petitioner.

¶24

3. In that view of the matter, the present writ petition is hereby disposed of as infructuous.

¶25

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶26

Dated: 08^th January, 2026 Amar/Uploaded on 09.01.2026

¶27

Page | 2

¶28

W.P. (C) No.2726 of 2024

Vikash Kumar Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikash Kumar Sharma 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

Mahendra Prasad Vs State of Jharkhand

Basant Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Department of Land and Revenue

Sant Tulsi Apartment through Its Developer Kavita Prasad Vs Ranchi Municipal Corporation

Firoz Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mahendra Mishra Vs the Methodist Church in India, through Its General Secretary, Rev. Dr. Newton Manilal Parmar

Ms Universal Automated Fitness Centre through Its Partner Namely Punit Kauntia Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Department of Transport