Tej Narayan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Tej Narayan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief adjudicated. Petitioner directed to file a fresh representation within four weeks before respondent No.4 (Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department); the latter to consider the grievance and pass an appropriate order as per law within six weeks, referring to a committee/authority if necessary; any benefits found due to be granted within four weeks thereafter; reasons to be communicated if any part of the claim is rejected.

Issue for consideration

Redressal of the petitioner's service-related grievances, specifically that he has not received his entire post-retiral benefits. +1 more

Court's answer

The prayer of the petitioner was observed to be absolutely vague; on query, counsel clarified the grievance as non-receipt of entire post-retiral benefits.

Ratio / Principle

Declining to pass any substantive order at this stage, the court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation within four weeks before the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department (respondent No.4).

Key takeaways

From the records, the petitioner was transferred during service but did not join the transfer post and ultimately superannuated; the status of that non-joined period also needs consideration by the respondents.obiter¶18
On receipt of the fresh representation, the Chief Engineer will consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order as per law within six weeks.ratio¶22
If necessary, the case is to be placed before any committee or authority during the said six-week period.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Ananda Sen, J.) disposed of W.P.(S) No. 964 of 2026 (Tej Narayan Singh v. State of Jharkhand and others) on 11.02.2026 without adjudication. The 75-year-old petitioner, a retired employee who had been transferred during service but never joined the transfer post and thereafter superannuated, sought redressal of service-related grievances, specifically non-payment of his entire post-retiral benefits; the prayer was observed to be absolutely vague. Declining to pass any order at that stage, the court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation within four weeks before the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department (respondent No.4), who was to consider the grievance and pass an appropriate order as per law within six weeks (referring the case to a committee or authority if necessary); any benefits found due were to be granted within a further four weeks, and reasons communicated for any rejected claim.

2026:JHHC:3714

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 964 of 2026

Tej Narayan Singh, aged about 75 years, son of Late Kailash Singh, presently resident of VIP Colony, Near Maunia Baba Kutia, Ward No.18, Bikramganj, PO & PS-Bikramganj, Dist-Rohtas-802212, Bihar. … … Petitioner(s)

Versus

The State of Jharkhand.

The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Nepal House, PO & PS-Doranda, Distr-Ranchi.

The Engineer in Chief, Water Resources Department, Nepal House, PO & PS-Doranda, Distr-Ranchi.

The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Jheel Road, PO, PS & District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand.

The Superintending Engineer, Water Ways Circle, Jheel Road, PO, PS & District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand.

The Executive Engineer, Water Ways Division, Barhi, PO & PSBarhi, District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand.

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Sinha, the then Executive Engineer, Water Ways Division, Barhi, PO & PS-Barhi, DistrictHazaribagh, Jharkhand.

Mr. Shakal Deo Mishra, The Executive Engineer, Water Ways Division, Barhi, PO & PS-Barhi, District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. … … Respondent(s)

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

For the Petitioner(s) : Ms. Akanksha Basundhra Raje, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Suraj Prakash, Advocate

02/ 11^th February, 2026

1. Heard the parties.

2. The prayer of the petitioner is absolutely vague. The petitioner wants that his service-related grievances should be redressed. On query, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not got his entire post-retiral benefits.

3. From the records, I find that the petitioner was transferred during his service tenure but did not join the transfer post and ultimately superannuated. Thus, the status of the period, which the petitioner did not join, also needs to be considered by the respondents.

4. Thus, at this stage, it will not be proper to pass any

1

2026:JHHC:3714

order rather I direct the petitioners to file a fresh representation within four weeks before the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department-respondent No.4. On receipt of the same, he will consider the grievance of the petitioner and will pass an appropriate order as per law within six weeks and if it is necessary to place the case before any committee or any authority, the same should be placed during the said period.

5. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any benefits, the same will be granted to him within four weeks thereafter.

6. If any part of the claim of the petitioner is rejected, the reasons should be communicated to the petitioner within the aforesaid period.

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

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

11.02.2026 S.K.D.Cp-2

Uploaded on 12.02.2026

2