The State Of Jharkhand And Others vs Kedar Nath Mahto
2026 Latest Caselaw 236 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

The State Of Jharkhand And Others vs Kedar Nath Mahto on 15 January, 2026

Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad

Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                         L.P.A. No. 15 of 2026

              The State of Jharkhand and others             ---     ---                  Appellants
                                              Versus
              Kedar Nath Mahto                              ---     ---                  Respondent
                                                     ---

              CORAM:              Hon'ble The Chief Justice
                           Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad
                                                 ---

For the Appellant: Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr. S.C-1

---

02 / 15.01.2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

2. Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned Sr. S.C-1 for the Appellant-State,

refers us to paragraph-10 of the learned Single Judge's judgment and order

dated 14.11.2024 passed in W.P(S) No. 1241/2021, which reads as follows:

10. Having regard to the aforesaid discussions, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in the single vacant seat of female horizontal reservation in BC-II category and issue letter of appointment to the petitioner if there is no other candidate higher in the merit to the petitioner in BC-II category. It is made clear that the entire exercise shall be completed by the respondents within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order

3. Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, then points out, that there were at least more

than ten candidates higher in the merit than the petitioner in B.C-II category.

On this ground, after duly considering the candidature of the original petitioner,

no appointment letter was issued. He submits therefore, that the learned single

Judge, by exercising its contempt jurisdiction in Contempt Case (Civil) No.

549/2025, could not have or in any event, should not have directed the State to

issue appointment letter to the original petitioner.

4. Considering the submissions, now made, that there were more than ten

candidates having higher merit than the petitioner in the B.C.-II category, we

issue notice to the Respondent, returnable on 05th February, 2026.

5 Until the next date, the direction for issuing appointment letter to the

original petitioner i.e. Respondent herein, shall remain stayed.

6. The Appellant must take immediate steps for service upon the

Respondent.

(M.S. Sonak, C.J)

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J) January 15, 2026 Ranjeet/R. Kr.

Uploaded on 16.01.2026