Jharkhand High Court
Pancham Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 12 November, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
2025:JHHC:33897
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 461 of 2024
-----
1.Pancham Mahto, S/o Latu Mahto, Age-53 years, R/o Bardharwa, Murram Kala, PO- Gosa, PS: Ramgarh, District-Ramgarh.
2. Naresh Kumar, S/o Vishnu Dayal Mahto, Age-53 years, R/o H.No. 90, Near Ramgarh College, Murram Kala, PO: Gosa, PS: Ramgarh, District Ramgarh.
3. Kunwar Mahto, S/o Araj Lal Mahto, Age-55 years, R/o Murram Kala, PO-Gosa, PS: Ramgarh, District Ramgarh. ... ... Petitioners Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. Rahul Kumar Purwar, the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Higher and Technical Education Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at MDI Building, Dhurwa, PO & PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi,. Jharkhand.
3. Sunil Kumar, the Additional Secretary cum Director Technical Education, Higher and Technical Education Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at MDI Building, Dhurwa, PO & PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand.
4. Ramnivas Yadav, the Director, Higher Education, Higher and Technical Education Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at MDI Building, Dhurwa, PO & Ps Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand.
5. Dr. Md. Mokhtar Alam, The Registrar, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh, Sindoor, PO & PS: Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh.
6. Dr. Ratna Pandey, The Principal, Ramgarh College, A constituent Unit of Vinoba Bhave University, Ramgarh Cantt. PO & PS Ramgarh, District Ramgarh, Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
-------
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Sinha, Advocate;
Mr. Vijay Shankar, Advocate;
Mr. Md. Imran Hassan, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Navneet Toppo, AC to GP-1 For V.B. University : Mr. Dr. A.K.Singh, Advocate;
Mr. Sharon Toppo, Advocate
-------
th Order No.16/Dated: 12 November, 2025 I.A.No. 15068 of 2025
1. The present interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of opposite parties for modification of order dated 29.10.2025 by which Principal Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand was directed to appear before this court physically.
2. Having been satisfied with the reasons stated in the present interlocutory application especially in paragraph Nos. 2 onwards, the personal appearance of the Principal Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand is hereby dispensed with.
3. Accordingly, the present interlocutory application stands allowed.
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 461 of 2024
4. The learned counsel appearing for the concerned opposite party including the functionary of the State Government and the University have jointly submitted that the benefit in pursuance of the recommendation of 5th and 6th Pay Revision Commission have been paid including its consequential benefits.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that although the benefits based upon the recommendation of 5th and 6th Pay Revision Commission have been paid but the benefit of 7th Pay Revision Commission has not been extended.
6. Upon this Mr. Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the Vinoba Bhave University has submitted that difference of the consequential benefits pertaining to the recommendation of 7th Pay Revision Commission is in process and for the aforesaid purpose a committee has been constituted and the matter has been sent before the committee. The decision is expected to be taken within a month. It has been submitted that thereafter the decision of the committee will be sent to the State Government for its approval and allotment of the funds.
7. The learned counsel for the concerned opposite party has submitted that the moment the recommendation of the committee will be received, without any unnecessary delay, the approval as well as allotment shall be extended if the petitioners will be found entitled to get the same by the competent authority. It has also been submitted that the funds will be allotted in further period of three months from the date of taking such decision. The University, in turn thereof, shall release the consequential benefits to the petitioners within a further period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the fund from the State Government.
8. The present contempt petition, on the basis of the undertaking so given, is being disposed of.
9. However, liberty is reserved with the petitioners in case of non-
compliance of the order passed by this Court to approach the Court.
10. Accordingly, the present contempt case stands disposed of.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Date: 12th November, 2025 KNR/ Uploaded on 17.11.2025