[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Mukesh Pal vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 2 February, 2026
Author: Deepak Roshan
Bench: Deepak Roshan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 5009 of 2018
Mukesh Pal ... ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. ... ... Respondent(s)
With
W.P.(S) Nos. 6313 of 2017, 6500 of 2017, 7041 of 2017, W.P.(C) No. 2408
of 2018, W.P.(S) Nos. 5401 of 2018, 5412 of 2018, 6431 of 2018, 2109 of
2019, 2220 of 2019, 749 of 2021
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Alok Anand, Advocate
Mr. Shivam Pratap Singh, Advocate
Mr. Harshit Shekhar, Advocate
[in W.P.(S) Nos. 5009/2018, 5401/2018, 5412/
2018, 6431/2018, 2109/2019, 2220/2019]
Mr. Uttam Kr. Das, Advocate
[in W.P.(S) No. 2408 of 2018]
M/s. Mahesh Tewari & Shwetang Kr.
Tiwari, Advocates
[in W.P.(S) No. 6313 of 2017]
Mr. Rohit Roy, Advocate
[in W.P.(S) No. 7041 of 2017]
Mr. Kaustav Roy, Advocate
[in W.P.(S) No. 749 of 2021]
For the Respondent-TVNL : Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate
Mrs. Neeharika Mazumdar, Advocate
Mr. Rupesh Singh, Advocate
Mr. Sudhanshu Singh, Advocate
[in W.P.(S) Nos.5009/2018, 6313/2017, 5401/2018,
5412/2018, 6431/2018, 2109/2019, 2220/2019 &
749/ 2021]
For the Respondent No.5 & 6 : Ms. Akriti Shree, Advocate
[in W.P.(S) No. 6500/2017]
For the State : Mr. Munna Lal Yadav, SC (L&C)-III
Mr. Deepak Kr., AC to SC (L&C)-III
[in W.P.(S) No. 5412/2018 & 2220 of 2019]
Ms. Sunita Kumari, AC to Sr. SC-II
[in W.P.(S) No. 6500/2017]
--------
nd
Order No. 20 /Dated: 2 February 2026
Prima facie, it appears from perusal of the advertisement that there
was no mention of scaling of the marks, however, the respondents have done
scaling and as per the petitioners it has indirectly affected their appointment
inasmuch as all the petitioners are having more marks than the private
respondents in the written examination. From perusal of the advertisement, it
also appears that a procedure of examination was also mentioned as such
nobody can deviate from the advertisement; this is a settled principle of law
which need not to be repeated.
Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for the
respondent-TVNL very fairly submits that there can be one candidate who
might have been affected but it is not possible that all the petitioners are
affected indirectly. He fairly submits that he would seek instruction on this
issue as to whether who are the candidates/petitioners who are having more
marks than the private respondents strictly as per the advertisement, meaning
thereby written examination and interview.
Having regard to the fair submission, list these cases on 16.02.2026 in
order to seek up-to-date instruction.
On the next date of hearing, learned senior counsel shall also come
prepared with the original marks of the present petitioners viz-a-viz the
private respondents.
It goes without saying that the respondents are only directed to bring
the result with respect to present petitioners and no separate petition will be
entertained subsequently on the basis of this order.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
2nd February 2026
Amit
