Miss Basanti Kumari vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 3251 Jhar

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 3251 Jhar
Judgement Date : 12 March, 2025

Jharkhand High Court

Miss Basanti Kumari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 12 March, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        W.P.(S) No.6760 of 2004
                                   ------

1. Miss Basanti Kumari

2. Sewak Ram

3. Indra Nayak ... ... Petitioners Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Human Resources and Development Department, Ranchi, Government of Jharkhand.

2. The Under Secretary, Human Resources and Development Department, Ranchi, Government of Jharkhand.

3. The Ranchi University, Ranchi.

4. The Vice Chancellor, Ranchi University, Ranchi.

5. The Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi.

... ... Respondents

------

              CORAM        : SRI ANANDA SEN, J
                                  ------
   For the Petitioner(s) :     None present.
   For the Respondent(s):      Mr. Niraj Kumar Mishra, AC to GP-IV
                                    ------

08/ 12.03.2025

No one appears on behalf of the petitioners today.

2. On the last date also i.e. 03.03.2025, no one appeared

on behalf of the petitioners.

3. Learned counsel representing the respondent - State

reiterated his submission which was recorded in order dated

03.03.2025. The order dated 03.03.2025 reads as hereunder:-

"No one appears for the petitioners.

2. Learned counsel for the State takes this Court through the order dated 11.02.2015. He submits that S.L.P. No. 9148 of 2011 has now been dismissed on 17.03.2021. He submits that since the S.L.P. has been dismissed no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this case.

3. The order dated 11.02.2015 reads as follows: -

"The dispute in the writ petition is with respect to fixation of pay scale.

The respondents have placed reliance upon the judgment rendered in Ranchi University, Ranchi & Ors. vs. Bijay Kumar Sharma & Ors. as reported in 2011 (1) JLJR 238 submitting that the case of the

petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court.

As against this, counsel for the petitioners has submitted that against the judgment rendered in LPA No. 576 of 2003 reported in 2011 (1) JLJR 238 an S.L.P. being S.L.P. No.9148/2011 has been preferred before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which is pending consideration by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

The office is directed to list this case after disposal of S.L.P. No.9148/2011.

The parties are at liberty to mention this case immediately after disposal of the case in the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

In the meantime, the interim order dated 24.12.2004 shall continue."

4. Since, the S.L.P. has already been dismissed, the prayer of the petitioners gets squarely covered by the judgment passed in L.P.A. No. 576 of 2003.

5. Considering the aforesaid fact, prima facie I am of the opinion that in view of the judgment passed in the L.P.A. and S.L.P., no relief can be granted to the petitioners.

6. Since, the counsel for the petitioners is absent today. To give one more opportunity, list this case in the next week under the heading "For Orders".

7. It is made clear if the counsel for the petitioners doesn't appear, appropriate order be passed in this case. "

4. Considering the aforesaid fact and the fact that the

petitioners are not appearing in this case, which also gives an

impression that they have lost their interest in this case, this writ

petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.