Turiya Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Its ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 403 Jhar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                  W.P. (S) No. 5462 of 2022

          Turiya Oraon....                                                  ...... Petitioner.
                                           Versus
              1.   The State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary.
              2.   The Secretary, Department of Road Construction, Govt. of Jharkhand,
                   Ranchi.
              3.   The Engineer-in-Chief, Department of Road Construction Department, Govt.
                   of Jharkhand, Ranchi.                                .... Respondents.

                                               ------

          CORAM         :     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
                                        ------
          For the petitioner(s):  Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate.
          For the State:          Mr. Aditya Raman, AC to GA-III.
                                        ------

04/23.01.2023:          Counsel for the petitioner submits that suffice it would be if a direction

is given to respondent No. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner seeking his promotion. He submits that the petitioner is working as Junior Engineer since 13.10.1995 and his juniors have been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer, but the petitioner has been left out. He refers the orders passed in WPS No. 3198 of 2018 (Durlabh Bandhu Surin Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.) and WPS No. 2732 of 2012 (Shambhoo Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.). He further submits that the case of the petitioner is similar to that of the cases decided by this Court, thus the same relief may be granted to the petitioner.

Counsel for the State denies the submission that the case of the petitioner stands on similar footing to that of the petitioners of WPS Nos. 3198 of 2018 and 2732 of 2012, but admits that the case of the petitioner will be looked into and if the petitioner is legally entitled to the said benefit, the same may be extended to him, considering the law and the orders/judgments of this Court as well as considering the seniority list.

Considering the aforesaid submission, I direct the petitioner to file representation within a period of four weeks annexing all the documents which is in his favour before respondent no.2, who will look into the matter and resolve the grievance of the petitioner within a period of four weeks thereafter. If the petitioner is entitled to the benefit, the same should be extended to him within three weeks thereafter. If the case of the petitioner is rejected, reasons should be communicated to him within the aforesaid period.

Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of.

          Anu/- CP2                                                      (ANANDA SEN, J.)