Allowed

Shivaji Pandey v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Sept 2026WPC/7260/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by five retired employees of the Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation (JSFDC) seeking extension of superannuation benefits from 58 to 60 years. The court relied on a prior Division Bench decision in L.P.A. No. 442 of 2006, affirmed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3384 of 2012, which had already granted such benefits to similarly situated employees. The respondents did not oppose the petition. The court directed the respondents to verify records and extend all benefits, including issuing a Form-I order, within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to verify records, issue Form-I order and extend all consequential service, retiral and monetary benefits flowing from enhancement of superannuation age from 58 to 60 years within eight weeks.

Shivaji Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:28070 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P. (S) No. 7260 of 2026

¶4

Shivaji Pandey, aged about-76 years, Son of Late Hardeo Pandey, Resident of-228, Ganga Niketan, Dewas P.O. & P.S.Dewas Dist-Dewas State Madhya Pradesh

¶5

Radha Krishn Rai, aged about-75 years, Son of Late Ram Krishn Rai, Resident of-Qno.285 F-Raod West Layout Sonari P.O. & P.S. Sonari Dist-East Singbhum

¶6

Gopal Pandey, aged about-76 years, Son of Late Phuldeo Pandey, Resident of-Krishnapuri road no. 4 Daltonganj P.O. & P.S. Daltonganj Dist-Daltonganj

¶7

Dhanwant Upadhyay, aged about-76 years, Son of Late Rambrikch Upadhyay, Resident of-Village Godhya P.O. & P.S.Ranka Bawlia Dist-Garhwa

¶8

Binod Bihar Mandal, aged about-76 year, Son of Shishudhar Mandal, Resident of-55 New Colony Nimdih Chaibasa West Singhbhum Jharkhand .... Petitioner(s)

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Jharkhand.

¶11

The Secretary, Forest and Environment and Climate Change, Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, Distt-Ranchi.

¶12

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, having its office at Ban Bhawan Doranda, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, Distt-Ranchi.

¶13

The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation, having its office at Road No. 5, Ashok Nagar, P.O. Ashoknagar, P.S.-Argora, Distt-Ranchi. .... Respondent(s)

¶14

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶15

¶16

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Piyush Chitresh, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandan Tiwari, A.C. to G.A.-I For the Resp.(JSFDC) : Mr. Dr. A.K. Singh, Advocate : Mr. Sharan Toppo, Advocate

¶17

02/Dated: 16.09.2026

¶18

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶19

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the

¶20

petitioners praying therein for the following reliefs:

¶21

“ i. For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), orer(s) or direction(s), particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding upon the respondents to extend to the petitioners all consequential service and monetary benefits flowing from the enhancement of the age of superannuation from 58 years to 60 years, in terms of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal no.3384 of 2012 (State of Jharkhand v. Phulchand Minz & Ors.), whereby the judgment

¶22

¶23

( 2026:JHHC:28070 )

¶24

and order passed by this Hon’ble Court in L.P.A. No. 442 of 2006 was affirmed, holding the age of superannuation of the employees of the Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation (JSFDC) stands enhanced from 58 years to 60 years, at par with the employees of the State Government, and consequently to grant and release all attendant service, retiral and monetary benefits arising therefrom to the petitioners within such time as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court .”

¶25

3 . At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in this writ application has been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 442 of 2006 which has been further upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court (Annexure-9) and (Annexure-10) respectively.

¶26

4. Learned counsel further submits that the benefit what was directed by the Division Bench in the above referred L.P.A. has already been extended to legal heirs of the respective employees at (Annexure-11); accordingly, similar benefit may be granted.

¶27

6. Learned counsel for the respondents does not oppose the aforesaid contention that the issue involved in this writ application has been decided in L.P.A. No. 442 of 2006 and further sustained/upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court.

¶28

7. Having regard to the above, the instant writ application stands allowed relying upon the finding of L.P.A. No. 442 of 2006 which was upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide Annexure-10 and therefore, the concerned respondents are directed to verify the records of the case and extend the entire benefits, what was given to the respective legal heirs of the erstwhile employee vide Annexure-11. After verification of record the concerned respondent shall issue a Form-I order with regard to benefits and

¶29

¶30

( 2026:JHHC:28070 )

¶31

extend the same. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶32

8. Accordingly, this application stands allowed.

¶33

9. The pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.

¶34

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶35

SEPTEMBER 16, 2026 Nandini/uploaded

¶36

Shivaji Pandey v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivaji Pandey v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases