Goutam Prasad vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1075 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Goutam Prasad vs The State Of Jharkhand on 12 February, 2026

Author: Deepak Roshan

Bench: Deepak Roshan

                                                                          2026:JHHC:3811



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                      W.P.(S). No. 3522 of 2013
                                                 ----------

1. Goutam Prasad, son of Sri Uma Shankar Prasad, resident of Village Berwari, P.O. Childag, P.S. Angara, District Ranchi.

2. John Toppo, son of Bhagloo Toppo, resident of village Tangra Toli, P.O. Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeonagar, District Ranchi.

...... Petitioners Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand.

2. The Secrtary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

3. The Chairman, Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Circular Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi.

...... Respondents

---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

---------

               For the Petitioner s      :       None
               For the State             :       Mr. Divyam, AC to SC-IV
               For the JPSC              :       M/s. Sanjoy Piprawall, Prince Kumar,

Jay Prakash, Rakesh Ranjan, Advocates

----------

09/ 12.02.2026 None appears for the petitioners even on repeated calls.

2. Since this case relates to selection process of Deputy Collectors pursuant to Advt. No.09/2010, dated 8th October, 2010, published by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, this Court is proceeding to decide the case on merit on the basis of documents available on record and the assistance given by the learned counsel for the respondent-State and JPSC.

3. From the writ application itself it appears that the petitioner has challenged the entire selection process including the examination process and subsequent proceeding which was undertaken by the concerned respondents for appointment of the Deputy Collectors pursuant to Advt. No.09/2010, dated 8th October, 2010.

4. From the records it appears that the entire selection process has been over way back in the year 2013 itself and the petitioner has not even made the selected candidates as private respondents in the instant writ application. Therefore, on the one hand the writ

2026:JHHC:3811

application is fit to be dismissed for non-joinder of the necessary parties as well as for the reason that by efflux of time, the entire selection process is over and perhaps this is the reason that the counsel for the petitioners is not taking any interest in the instant case.

5. Having regard to the aforesaid observations, the instant writ application stands dismissed.

(Deepak Roshan, J.) 12th February, 2026 Kunal/-

Uploaded on 16/02/2026