Jharkhand High Court
Mithilesh Oraon @ Mithilesh Uraon vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Its Chief ... on 15 January, 2026
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
2026:JHHC:1006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 134 of 2026
------
Mithilesh Oraon @ Mithilesh Uraon, age about 31 years, Son of
Basmati Devi (Adopted mother), resident of Village Pokaraha, PO
-Rajwadih & PS-Medninagar, District-Palamu.
... ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary,
Government of Jharkhand, office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa,
PO, GPO & PS-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.
2. The Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry & Fisheries,
Govt. Of Jharkhand, office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, PO,
GPO & PS-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.
3. The Director Department of Animal Husbandry, Nepal House
Doranda, PO -Doranda, PS-Doranda, District-Ranchi.
4. The Deputy Commissioner, Palamu Office at Collectorate
Building Daltongaj (Medininagar) PO, GPO, PS-Daltonganj,
District-Palamu.
5. The District Animal Husbandry Officer Medninagar
(Daltonganj) office at District Animal Husbandry Office,
Sadar Block Colony, PO, GPO PS, Daltonganj District-Palamu.
6. Sub-Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer office at Sub-
Divisional Animal Husbandry Office, PO, GPO-Medninagar,
PS-Daltonganj District-Palamu.
7. Deo Laliya Kuwar, daughter of not know, permanent resident
of village Dhawadih PO-Dhawadih & PS-Leshliganj, District-
Palamu.
Current Address-Resident of Village Pokaraha, PO,
Rajwadih & PS-Medninagar, District-Palamu.
8. Umesh Oraon Son of Sakildeo Uranav Resident of Village
Dhawadih PO-Dhawadih & PS-Lesliganj, District-Palamu.
... ... Respondent(s)
------
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. Nirupama, AC to Sr. SC-II
------
th
02/ 15 January, 2026
1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner claims to be the adopted son of Basmati Devi who died in harness.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that even in spite of the said adoption, the petitioner is not been granted compassionate appointment, as an objection has been made by the sister of the 1 2026:JHHC:1006 deceased.
4. It is the submission of the petitioner that the sister of the deceased has got no authority to object the same, when there is an adoption deed.
5. After hearing the parties, I find that Annexure-1 which is alleged to be an adoption-deed is dated 07.12.1994. The deed is not a registered deed, its only notarized. Further, there is a document at Page No.34 of this writ petition which is a nomination form, wherein the deceased has nominated this petitioner to receive the general provident fund. In the nomination form, the petitioner is shown to be the nephew of the deceased. This nomination form is executed after the execution of Annexure-1, which is alleged to be the adoption deed.
6. This Court fails to understand that when the petitioner is actually adopted in 1994, then thereafter in the nomination form, why it was necessary to mention the relationship of the petitioner with the deceased as nephew. This creates a doubt about the deed itself.
7. Further, another ground which creates a doubt is that in the deed, it has been written by the deceased that as she is growing old and as her husband died 10 months ago, it is necessary to adopt the petitioner whose age is mentioned as 10 years. But on query, the learned counsel for the petitioner after calculating the age of the deceased, submits that on the date of execution of the alleged deed, the deceased would have been aged about 19 years. Thus, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition as the petitioner has to first establish that the petitioner is the adopted son of the deceased.
8. The petitioner should approach the appropriate Civil Court and first get a declaration that the petitioner is the adopted son and then only this case for appointment can be considered.
9. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.
(ANANDA SEN, J.) 15.01.2026 S.K.D., cp2 Uploaded on 21.01.2026 2