Jharkhand High Court
Prakash Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 December, 2025
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024
---
1. Prakash Kumar, son of Nand Kishore Poddar, resident of
Village, P.O. & P.S.- Itkhori, District- Chatra
2. Shyam Kumar, son of Triloky Mistri, resident of Sindwar Toli,
P.O. & P.S.- Namkum, District- Ranchi
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi through
its Chairman
4. The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission,
Ranchi
5. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission, Ranchi
6. The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Prison &
Disaster Management, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
7. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi
8. The Officer-In-Charge, Sadar Police Station, Kokar Industrial
Area, Kokar, Ranchi
.... ... Respondents
With
W.P.(S) No. 1476 of 2025
---
1. Manish Kumar, son of Bhardul Ram, resident of Village &
P.O.- Sangbariya, P.S.- Meral, District- Garhwa.
2. Akhilesh Kumar, son of Kedar Saw, resident of Village- Pipra,
P.O.- Narchahi, P.S.- Itkhroi, & District- Chatra.
3. Chandan Kumar Roy, son of Dharam Narayan Roy, resident of
Village-Chandraydih, P.O.- Taranakho, P.S.- Dhanwar &
District- Giridih.
4. Kaushal Kumar, son of Raman Kumar Singh, resident of
Village- Bela, P.O.- Hafua, P.S.- Chatra, & District- Chatra.
5. Suchit Kumar Ray, son of Sakaldeo Ray, resident of Village-
Manodih, P.O.- Kubri, P.S.- Dhanwar, & District- Giridih.
6. Sunita Kispotta, daughter of Khaddi Kispotta, resident of
Tuko, P.O & P.S.- Bero, District- Ranchi.
7. Rahul Kumar, son of Sushil Kumar Mehta, resident of Khurra,
P.O. & P.S.- Barwadih, & District- Latehar.
8. Vijay Kumar Mahto, son of Chintu Mahto resident of Village-
Harilagora, P.O.- Dudhigazar, P.S.- Chas & District- Bokaro.
9. Pankaj Kumar Saha, son of Raj Kumar Saha, resident of
Udhwa, P.O.- Udhwa, P.S.- Radhanagar & District- Sahibganj.
10. Sanket Kumar Saha, son of Raj Kumar Saha, resident of
Udhwa, P.O.- Udhwa, P.S.- Radhanagar & District- Sahibganj.
11. Ram Chandra Mandal, son of Kamleshwar Mandal, resident
1
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
of Village- Mahtodih, P.O.- Matrukha, P.S. & District- Giridih.
12. Premlal Thakur, son of Lila Hazam, resident of Village-
Kumaharlalo, P.O., P.S. & District- Giridih.
13. Ashish Kumar, son of Basudev Mehta, resident of Dumraon,
P.O., P.S. & District-Hazaribagh.
14. Rohit Kumar Singh, son of Ashok Singh, resident of
Sinbghpur, P.O., P.S. & District- Hazaribagh.
15. Hafij Ansari, son of Urma Ansari, resident of Haril, Kumba
Toli, P.O., P.S. Ranchi & District- Ranchi.
16. Sanjar Shakeel, son of Shakeel Akhtar, resident of near
Pathalkudwa Masjid, Deputy Lane Pathalkudwa, P.O., G.P.O.-
Ranchi, P.S- Sukhdeonagar, District- Ranchi.
17. Surendra Kumar, son of Kripal Hazam, resident of Village,
P.O. & P.S- Nutandih & District- Bokaro.
18. MD Moshim Ansari, son of Shekh Khadim Rasul, resident of
Ward No. 2, Village- Sangrahe Khurd, P.O. Sangrahe, P.S. &
District - Garhwa
19. Masud Alam, son of Anish Ahmad, resident of Ward No. 6,
Village -Meral, P.O.- Meral, P.S. & District -Garhwa.
20. Abhishek Kumar, son of Om Prakash Thakur, resident of
Village & P.O.- Makka, District - Ranchi.
21. Satish Kumar Gupta, son of Shiv Kumar Gupta, resident of
Ward No. 1, Village Tenar, P.O., P.S. & District - Garhwa.
22. Pradeep Kullu, son of Ignatius Kullu, resident of Village-
Kesra, P.O.- T. Tangar, P.S.-Ghutbahar, District - Simdega.
23. Sujit Hembrom, son of Shyamlal Hembrom, resident of
Village & P.O.- Shahpur, P.S.-Beldiha, District - Godda.
24. Kunal Gaurav, son of Vijay Kumar Soni, resident of House
No. 59, Main Road, P.O., P.S. Garhwa & District - Garhwa.
25. MD Parwej Alam, son of Akhtar Ansari, resident of Near
Electric Poll, Kokdoro, P.O. & P.S.- Kanke , District-Ranchi.
26. Pankaj Kumar Mahto, son of Daleshwar Mahto, resident of
Tola Bakhari, Village- Ahardih, Surhi, P.O, P.S. & District-
Bokaro.
27. Pappu Kumar Thakur, son of Dhaneshwar Thakur, resident of
New Anandpur, Khijri, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi, District- Ranchi.
28. Govinda Kumar, son of Dashrath Kewat, resident of Near
Hanuman Mandir, Makchund Toli, Chutia, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi ,
District - Ranchi.
29. Anisha Kumari, wife of Saban Baitha, resident of Village-
Bingaon, P.S. Kara & District - Khunti.
30. Ravi Shankar, son of Tipan Mahto, resident of Village Tantri
South, P.O.- Tupkadih, P.S. Jaridih & District - Bokaro.
31. Amit Kumar Mahto, son of Rabindra Mahto, resident of Khijri
Nayatoli, Namkum, P.O. & P.S. Ranchi , District - Ranchi.
32. Deepak Kumar Ram, son of Krishna Ram, resident of Village-
Mango, P.O.- Tantri, P.S. Bokaro & District - Bokaro.
33. Sanjay Kumar, son of Mantosh Mahto, resident of Hendebilli,
P.O. & P.S.- Ormanjhi , District Ranchi.
34. Sonu Kumar, son of Bindeshwar Saw, resident of 180 EDLA,
P.O. & P.S.- Chatra , District - Chatra.
2
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
35. Raj Vardhan Sinha, son of Raj Nandan Prasad Sinha,
resident of Ashiana Heights, Oberiya Road, Chandani Chowk,
Hatiya, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi , District- Ranchi
36. Dashrath Kumar Mahto, son of Ramlal Mahto, resident of
Village- Sirka Nayatoli, P.O. Angara, P.S.- Ranchi & District -
Ranchi
37. Santu Kumar, son of Saryu Ram, resident of Village-
Sohgara, P.O.- Shivpur, P.S. Kandi & District Garhwa
38. Vinod Kumar Mahto, son of Nemdhari Mahto, resident of
Village- Soso, P.O. & P.S.- Ramgarh , District - Ramgarh
39. Rohit Ranjan, son of Dilip Kumar Singh, resident of Village-
Lututand, P.O.- Galgaltand, P.S.- Chandankiyari & District -
Bokaro
40. Sandeep Kumar, son of Batul Chandra Mahto, resident of
Village- Bhawanipur Side Kultand, P.O. & P.S.- Chas , District
- Bokaro
41. Md Wasim Ansari, son of Md Islam Ansari, resident of
Village- Dulidih, P.O. & P.S- Poraiyahat, & District -Godda.
42. Md Amzad Ali, son of Md Zakir Ali, resident of At/P.O.-
Phuljhanjhri, P.S.- Pakuria & District- Pakur.
43. Md Zahid, son of Md Najmuddin, resident of Line Muhalla,
Khanqua Road, P.O., P.S & District- Chatra.
44. Prashant Oraon, son of Madi Oraon, resident of Nayasaray
Aani, Tundiul, P.O. Murma Nayasarai, P.S.- Ranchi & District -
Ranchi.
45. Md Islam Mian, son of Somar Miya, resident of Line Gram
Kurumdiha, P.O.- Remba, P.S.- Hirodih, Dhuraita & District -
Giridih.
46. Md Razauddin Ansari, son of Md Imtiyaz Ansari, resident of
Champapur, P.O.-Chainpur, P.S. & District- Jamtara.
47. Rohit Choudhary, son of Prakash Choudhary, resident of
Hariharpur, P.S.- Barwadda, P.O.-Panjania & District -
Dhanbad.
48. Rohit Mishra, son of Abhay Mishra, resident of Raja Jenral
Stor, Chitra Gupt Colony, Indrapuri, Hehal, P.O., P.S.- &
District - Ranchi.
49. Shiv Shankar Prajapati, son of Baldev Prajapati, resident of
Shankarpur Parsudih, Near Nehru Chowk, P.O.- Sarjamda,
P.S & District - Purbi Singhbhum.
50. Ajay Kumar Yadav, son of Gupteshwar Prasad Yadav,
resident of Village Deoria, P.O. & P.S.- Ghaghra, District -
Ramgarh.
51. Kanchan Kumari, wife of Ajay Kumar Yadav, resident of
Village - Shivnagar Pirra, P.O. - Pirra, P.S. - Ratu & District
Ranchi.
52. Anil Kumar, son of Dubraj Munda, resident of Village- Bilari,
P.O.- Bahera, P.S. & District- Chatra.
53. Mritunjay Verma, son of Arun Verma, resident of Near Kali
Mandir, P.O. & P.S.- Shikaripara , District - Dumka.
54. Aditya Kumar Gupta, son of Devdhari Saw, resident of
Village- Purnadih, P.O.- Lohandi, P.S. -Chouparan & District -
Hazaribag.
3
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
55. Sanjit Bhagat, son of Laxmi Narayan Bhagat, resident of
Torar Maina Toli, P.O.- Arru, P.S.- Senha & District- Lohardaga
56. Bidyasagar Bhagat, son of Parmeshwar Bhagat, resident of
Village, P.O. & Panchayat-Danru, P.S.- Block-Senha & District
- Lohardaga.
57. Ankesh Oraon, son of Jagmohan Oraon, resident of Village -
Kasamar, P.O. & P.S.- Herhanj & District Chatra.
58. Sumit Pahan, son of Anil Pahan, resident of Village- Chakla,
P.O. & P.S.- Ormanjhi & District - Ranchi.
59. Sagar Seth, son of Pannalal Seth, resident of Village-
Sarjamdih, P.O. Saejamdih, P.S.- Tamar & District - Ranchi
60. Randhir Kumar, son of Dhaneshwar Prasad Yadav, resident
of Village- Kheshnaro, P.O.- Kahuwat, P.S.- Gawan & District -
Giridih.
61. Ashish Munda, son of Mahendra Nath Munda, resident of
Niche Toli Kamre, P.O.& P.S.- Ratu & District - Ranchi.
62. Brij Kishore Prasad, son of R.K. Prasad, resident of Lalganj,
Mahuatoli, P.O.- Lalganj, P.S.- Ranchi & District - Ranchi.
63. Sanjit Kumar, son of Yogendra Prasad, resident of Jora Talab,
P.O. & P.S.- Bariyatu, & District-Ranchi.
64. Bijendra Besra, son of Baidyanath Besra, resident of
Panchayat- Chhotadawna, P.O.- Tablapur, P.S.- Akhinathpur &
District- Serailela-kharsawan.
65. Pranit Mishra, son of Dwarika Nath Mishra, resident of Near
Water Ways Gate, Jawahar Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Gumla &
District - Gumla.
66. Praveen Kumar Mishra, son of Dwarika Nath Mishra, resident
of Near Water Ways Gate, Jawahar Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Gumla
& District - Gumla.
67. Runel Kerketta, son of Ruben Sunil Kerketta, resident of
H.O.52, Road No. 3, P.O & P.S. - Jagannathpur, District -
Ranchi.
68. Mahesh Baghwar, son of Bawna Baghwar, resident of Sama
Toli, P.O., P.S. & District - Gumla.
69. Priytam Kumar Gupta, son of Madhusudan Sahu, resident of
Village- Barlanga, Near Railway Line, P.O. & P.S.- Barlanga &
District - Ramgarh.
70. Gyandev Kisku, son of Bhola Kisku, resident of Village-
Amarpur, P.O.- Pathra, P.S.- Godda & District - Godda
71. Krishna Kumar Oraon, son of Lalbir Oraon, resident of
Village- Chatti, P.O.- Adar, P.S- Ghaghra & District - Gumla.
72. Raj Kumar Rajesh, son of Lekha Mistri, resident of Line
Muhalla, Pansawla, Near Ara Machine, P.O. & P.S.- Chatra ,
District - Chatra.
73. Md Irfanul Wala Quadry, son of Md Montinuddin Shah,
resident of Village- Unchari, P.O. & P.S.- Garhwa , District -
Garhwa.
74. Surajit Nayak, son of Pashupati Nayak, resident of Village -
Sarsabera, P.O. & P.S.-Ram Chandra Pur & District- East
Singhbhum.
75. Vijay Kumar Das, son of Maneshwar Das, resident of Ward
No. 5, Kenman Kathi, Ghaghi, P.O. & P.S.- Jasidih & District -
4
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Deoghar.
76. Navin Kumar Mishra, son of Madhu Sudhan Mishra, resident
of Kasidih, P.O.- Lagam, P.S. & District - Ranchi.
77. Sushil Kumar, son of Ghuran Lohra, resident of Village-
Dumardih, P.O.- Lasia, P.S. - Kolebira & District - Simdega.
78. Rakhi Kumari, daughter of Radheshyam Singh, resident of
Village- New Colony, Panchayat- Tajpur, P.O. & P.S.
Chouparan, District - Hazaribagh.
79. Priyanka Kumari, daughter of Ramphal Bedia, resident of
Village - Nimi, P.O., P.S. & District - Ramgarh.
80. Trilochan Mahto, son of Shivnath Mahto, resident of Village
- Kareyadih, P.O. - Patrahatu, P.S. & District-Ranchi.
81. Shashi Kant Gope, son of Kanchu Gope, resident of Village -
Chatakpur, P.O.- Tetri, P.S.- Namkum & District - Ranchi.
82. Manoj Kumar Mahato, son of Bhuneshwar Prasad Mahato,
resident of Near Middle School, Gendnawdih, P.O. & P.S.-
Tantri & District - Dhanbad.
83. Neelam Kumari, daughter of Mohan Lal Mahto, resident of
P.O.- Turmuli, P.S.- Burmu, Village - Geswe, P.O. - Brambe &
District - Ranchi.
84. Reeta Kumari, daughter of Manga Oraon, resident of Village-
Chardi, P.O.- Kumhariya, P.S.- Pithoria & District - Ranchi.
85. Ashutosh Kumar Deo, son of Abhay Kumar Deo, resident of
Village- Nawadih & District Deoghar.
86. Anup Kumar Mahto, son of Shashadhar Mahto, resident of
Village - Basahatu, P.O.- B. Nawadih, P.S. - Sonahatu &
District - Ranchi.
87. Sonu Sahu, son of Dhaneshwar Sahu, resident of Village-
Kachmachi & District- Lohardaga.
88. Reshma Topno, daughter of Rijha Topno, resident of P.O. &
P.S.- Karra, Village- Masmano & District- Khunti.
89. Raj Kishor Mehta, son of Dharm Nath Mahto, resident of
Village- Telmunga, Tola Churingadha, P.O. & P.S. Kasmar,
District - Bokaro.
90. Sanjay Kumar Sahu, son of Dilesh Chandra Sahu, resident of
Village & P.O.- Sakra, P.S.- Mandar & District - Ranchi.
91. Khushboo Kumari, daughter of Rajesh Singh, resident of
Village- Singharawan, P.O. & P.S.- Narchahi & District -
Hazaribagh
92. Deepak Kumar Nayak, son of Basant Nayak, resident of 26A,
Urmi Tira Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Tirra & District - Gumla.
93. Mahendra Sahu, son of Prashant Kumar Sahu, resident of
P.O. & P.S.- Kolabira, Panchayat- Muria & District- Seraikela-
Kharsawan.
94. Tulsi Mahato, daughter of Satish Mahato, resident of Village-
Sindri, P.O. & P.S.- Rangamati & District - Dhanbad.
95. Prem Kumar Bhagat, son of Basram Bhagat, resident of
Village- Sabano, P.O. & P.S.- Udaypura & District- Latehar.
96. Anjni Kumari, daughter of Gandura Oraon, resident of P.O.-
Tilmi, Village- Bamarja, P.S. & District - Khunti.
97. Muneshwar Mahto, son of Surpati Mahto, resident of P.O. &
P.S.-Jurdag, Village- Asanmanri & District- Khunti.
5
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
98. Anil Mahto, son of Ram .i Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.-
Ammapakana, P.S.- Torpa & District - Khunti.
99. Nimay Kumar Dubey, son of Ram Chandra Dubey, resident
of Village- Sirsagarh, P.O.- Singdaha, P.S.- Topchanchi &
District- Dhanbad.
100. Amar Abhishek Minj, son of Sudhir Minj, resident of
Village-Sosai, P.O. & P.S.-Sosai Ashram, Tehsil - Mandar &
District- Ranchi.
101. Pawan Kumar, son of Sakaldeep Prajapati, resident of
Village- Sinduriya, P.O.- Sinduriya, P.S.- Daltonganj & District-
Palamu.
102. Mumtaz Ahamad, son of Abdul Quddus, resident of
Village- Balsokra, P.O- Balsokra, P.S.- Chanho & District-
Ranchi.
103. Anand Mohan, son of Ajit Kumar Singh, resident of Village
- Chanaigir, P.O.- Getha, P.S. Lesliganj & District - Palamu.
104. Navnit Kumar Das, son of Sanjay Kumar Das, resident of
Village- Soparam, P.O.- Koed, P.S.- Tandwa & District -
Chatra.
105. Sonu Kumar Verma, son of Binod Swarnkar, resident of
839, Khudgadda, P.O. & P.S.- Gomia & District - Bokaro.
106. Ajay Tirkey, son of Poulus Tirkey, resident of Village-
Bagantoli, P.O.- Jonha, P.S.- Angara & District- Ranchi.
107. Binod Kumar, Son of Lt Rimish Oraon, resident of Village-
Kumbatoli, P.O. Telgaon, P.S. - Gumla & District - Gumla.
108. Madan Pradhan, son of Mohari Gangjhu, resident of
Village- Renchi, P.O.- Barikhep, P.S. Balumath & District -
Latehar.
109. Nakul Kumar, son of Mohari Gangjhu, resident of Village-
Renchi, P.O.- Barikhep, P.S.- Balumath & District - Latehar.
110. Santosh Kumar Mandal, son of Ganpat Mandal, resident of
Village- Karudih, P.O.- Karudih, P.S.- Ramgarh & District -
Dumka.
111. Surendra Turi, son of Devlal Turi, resident of Village-
Sarwindha, P.O.- Bara, P.S.- Banjhi & District-Godda.
112. Nitin Anupam, son of Amrendra Prasad Verma, resident of
Goushala Road, P.O.- Dhundani, P.S.- Dumka & District -
Dumka.
113. Mikky Kumari, daughter of Pramod Kumar Ray, resident of
Village- Jagatpur, P.O.- Amrapahari, P.S.- Ramgarh & District
- Dumka.
114. Amitesh Bhandari, son of Nishikant Bhandari, resident of
Ward No. 11, Post Office Road, P.O.- Satsangh Nagar, P.S.-
Godda & District - Godda.
115. Ujjwal Kumar Sah, son of Chandra Shekhar Pd Sah,
resident of Village- Dhoba, P.O. & P.S.-Ramgarh & District-
Dumka.
116. Dharmendra Kumar, son of Sahdev Sah, resident of Village
- Sanmani, P.O.- Rohra, P.S.-Sahebganj & District-
Sahebganj.
117. Ritesh Kumar Thakur, son of Jaykant Thakur, resident of
Village- Khojwa, P.O.- Chilra, P.S.- Dumka & District - Dumka.
6
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
118. Krishna Mirdha, son of Mantu Mirdha, resident of House
No. 143, P.O.- Karayachak, P.S.-Bindapathar & District -
Jamtara.
119. Sonalal Pandit, son of Rajendra Pandit, resident of Village
- Jay Nagar Piper Joriya, P.O. - Nunbatta, P.S.- Nunbatta &
District - Godda.
120. Pravin Kumar, Son of Bhairo Saw, resident of Village-
Jabda, P.O.- Jabra, P.S.- Chatra & District- Chatra.
121. Pawan Kumar, son of Birbal Rana, resident of Village-
Sabano, P.O.- Sabona, P.S.- Chatra & District- Chatra.
122. Manoj Kumar Ram, son of Lal Deo Ram, resident of Village
& P.O.- Ganeshpur, P.S. Balumath & District - Latehar.
123. Pappu Kumar, son of Suresh Prajapati, resident of Village
- Bhandaria, P.O. & P.S.- Bhandaria , District - Garhwa.
124. Manish Kumar Saw, son of Wajir Saw, resident of
Dumardaga, P.O.- N.V.V. Buti, P.S.- Ranchi & District-Ranchi
125. Ajit Kumar, son of Bisheshwar Yadav, resident of Village -
Gawan, P.O. & P.S. - Gawan , District - Giridih.
126. Shatrudhan Kumar, son of Suresh Pandit, resident of
Village - Madangundi, P.O. & P.S.- Chandwara , District -
Koderma.
127. Sandeep Mandal, son of Nunulal Mandal, resident of
Village- Khawa, P.O.- Rani Khawa, P.S.- Pachamba & District -
Giridih.
128. Vikash Kumar, son of Birendra Prasad, resident of Near
Durga Mandir, P.O.- Chainpur P.S.- Mandu & District-
Ramgarh.
129. Krishna Ram, son of Devraj Ram, resident of Village-
Sabauna, P.O.& P.S.- Rehla , District - Palamu.
130. Dev Kumar Mahto, son of Bhuneshwar Mahto, resident of
Village- Sukri Garha, P.O. & P.S.- Lari , District- Ramgarh.
131. Dileep Kumar, son of Kedar Mahto, resident of Village-
Sukri Garha, P.O. & P.S.- Lari, District - Ramgarh.
132. Ramesh Kumar Mahto, son of Deonath Mahto, resident of
Village- Upar Tola, P.O.& P.S.- Patratu Tps, District -
Ramgarh.
133. Vinod Khalkho, son of Chamu Khalkho, resident of House
No. 107, P.O.&P.S.-Chakradharpur, District - West Singhbhum.
134. Piyush Kumar, son of Deepak Kumar, resident of Main
Road near Sadar Hospital, P.O.- Chandandih, P.S.- Latehar &
District - Latehar.
135. Anup Pandey, son of Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, resident of
Chandandih, P.O.- Chandandih, P.S.- Latehar & District -
Latehar.
136. Manju Bek, daughter of Bhola Oraon, resident of Jay
Narayan Bhagat, P.O.- Makka P.S.- Lohardaga & District -
Lohardaga.
137. Manoj Kumar, son of Vinod Prasad, resident of Village -
Banpur, P.O.& P.S.- Latehar , District - Latehar
138. Priyanka Kumari, daughter of Sitaram Singh, resident of
Village - Tasu, P.O.- - Tasu Herhanj, P.S. -Balu & District -
Latehar
7
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
139. Anuj Kumar Ram, son of Mahesh Ram, resident of Village,
P.O. & P.S - Ganeshpur, District - Latehar.
140. Pankaj Paswan, son of Ram Chalitar Manjhi, resident of
Village, P.O. & P.S.- Manika , District - Latehar.
141. Shubham Kumar Mishra, son of Deepak Kumar Mishra,
resident of Village & P.O.- Pungi, P.S.- Ranchi & District -
Ranchi.
142. Navin Prakash, son of Indu Mahto, resident of Village -
Berho, P.O. & P.S. - Tatijharia , District - Hazaribagh.
143. Sonu Kumar Yadav, son of Pradeep Kumar Yadav, resident
of Village- Devi Mandap Road, P.O.- Latehar RS, P.S.- Bajkum
& District - Latehar.
144. Deepak Kumar, son of Binod Prasad Jaiswal, resident of
Village- Bichalidag, P.O.- Matnog, P.S.- Latehar & District-
Latehar.
145. Prakash Ram, son of Ashok Ram, resident of Village-
Jubilee Road Banpur, P.O.- Banpur, P.S. - Latehar & District -
Latehar.
146. Faijan Alam, son of Shamim, resident of Village-
Amwatikar, P.O.- Amwatikar, P.S.- Latehar & District Latehar.
147. Arvind Kumar Singh, son of Chandra Kishore Singh,
resident of Village- Bhilma, P.O. & P.S.- Semaura , District -
Garhwa.
148. Nabab Alam, son of Shekh Md Salimuddin, resident of
Village & P.O.- Adar, P.S. - Manjiaon , District - Garhwa.
149. Rijwan Ansari, son of Reyasat Ansari, resident of Village -
Jatro Banjari, P.O- Adar, P.S. - Bardiha & District - Garhwa.
150. Sunil Kumar Yadav, son of Krishna Yadav, resident of
Village- Cheri, P.O.- Dabra, P.S.- Lesliganj & District - Palamu
151. Dhirendra Kumar Yadav, son of Banarsi Yadav, resident of
Village- Guasarai, P.O.- Kajru Khurd, P.S.- Pandu & District -
Palamu, Jharkhand..
152. Nitish Kumar, son of Chhathan Manjhi, resident of Village
& P.O.- Konwai, P.S.- Panki & District -Palamu, Jharkhand.
153. Mukesh Kumar Yadav, son of Mandev Yadav, resident of
Village- Kasiyad (Lapsera), P.O.- Ratnag, P.S-. Pandu &
District - Palamu, Jharkhand..
154. Sanjit Kumar, son of Jagrnath Yadav, resident of Village-
Simarsot, P.O.- Kukhi, P.S.- Haidarnagar & District - Palamu,
Jharkhand..
155. Pankaj Kumar, son of Raj Muni Mehata, resident of Village-
Sudana, P.O.& P.S.- Medininagar & District -Palamu,
Jharkhand.
156. Abhinav Kumar, son of Suresh Mahto, resident of New
Railway Crossing, Village- Sudana, P.S. & P.O.-Medininagar &
District - Palamu, Jharkhand.
157. Sandip Oraon, son of Nageshwar Oraon, resident of
Village- Madhaniya, Toil, P.O.- Besra, P.S.-Toli & District -
Latehar, Jharkhand.
158. Sukhlal Lohra, son of Late Sanika Lohra, resident of
Village- Kajibaru, P.O.- Humta, P.S.- Bundu & District- Ranchi,
8
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Jharkhand.
159. Vikash Yadav, son of Yugeshwar Yadav, resident of Block-
Herhanj, Village- Bandua, P.O. & P.S.- Serendag & District -
Latehar, Jharkhand.
160. Arjun Vishwakarma, son of Premlal Vishwakarma, resident
of Village- PNM College, At-Kheshmi, P.O.- Gomo, P.S.-
Topchanchi, District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand..
161. Paritosh Kumar Choudhary, son of Tripurari Choudhary,
resident of Village- Merakhogundi, P.O.-Fulchi, P.S.- Taratand
& District - Giridih, Jharkhand.
162. Prince Kumar, son of Nageshwar Prasad, resident of New
Area, Buxidih Road, P.O. & P.S.- Giridih, District - Giridih,
Jharkhand.
163. Vipin Kumar, son of Bahadur Roy, resident of Village-
Khoto, P.O.- Chatro, P.S.- Deori & District - Giridih, Jharkhand.
164. Ajay Kumar Roy, son of Brahmdeo Roy, resident of Village-
Prawatudih, P.O. & P.S.-Deori & District - Giridih, Jharkhand.
165. Manjay Kumar, son of Shivshankar Mandal, resident of
Village- Barany, P.O. & P.S.- Kesodih & District-Giridih,
Jharkhand.
166. Laljit Kumar, son of Bhuneshwar Yadav, resident of
Village- Baidapahari, P.O. - Gadi Bharkatta, P.S. -Birni &
District - Giridih, Jharkhand..
167. Rahul Kumar, son of Mithilesh Prasad Kushwaha, resident
of Village- Baragadha Kala, P.O.- Leda, P.S. & District -
Giridih, Jharkhand.
168. Chhatradhari Kumar Mandal, son of Rameshwar Mandal,
resident of Village - Rakaskutto, P.O.- Mandro, P.S. - Gandey
& District - Giridih, Jharkhand..
169. Anil Rana, son of Bnij Rana, resident of Village- Koldih,
P.O.- Phuljhariya, P.S. - Ahilyapur & District- Giridih,
Jharkhand.
170. Pramod Rana, son of Shobha Rana, resident of Village-
Koldih, P.O.- Phuljhariya, P.S.- Ahilyapur & District - Giridih,
Jharkhand.
171. Amarjeet Kumar Singh, son of Ram Prasad Singh, resident
of Village- Banjari, P.O. & P.S. Bhandaria & District - Garhwa,
Jharkhand.
172. Nawnit Kumar Upadhyay, son of Sidheshwar Upadhyay,
resident of Village - Karwa Khurdam, P.O.- Ranka Bauliya, P.S.
Garhwa & District Garhwa, Jharkhand.
173. Ujjawal Kumar, son of Umesh Prasad, resident of
Kamlapuri Muhalla, P.S.- Garhwa & District -Garhwa,
Jharkhand.
174. Basudev Mahto, son of Late Subash Chandra Mahto,
resident of Panchayat- Krishnapur, P.S. & P.O.-Kharawan &
District - Seraikela-Kharsawan, Jharkhand.
175. Rakesh Ranjan Pandey, son of Ram Kishor Pandey,
resident of Ward No. 21, Chhater Bagicha, P.S. & P.O.-
Lohardaga & District - Lohardaga, Jharkhand.
9
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
176. Ashok Kumar, son of Girija Prasad Yadav, resident of
Village- Pihra, P.S. & P.O.- Giridih & District -Giridih,
Jharkhand.
177. Suman Toppo, daughter of Sushil Toppo, resident of P.O.-
Hussir, P.S. & P.O.- Kanke & District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.
178. Prabhu Nath Prasad, son of Raj Nath Prasad, resident of
Devi Mandap Road, Hesal, P.O., P.S. & District- Ranchi,
Jharkhand.
179. Deepak Kumar Sah, son of Manoj Sah, resident of
Gulzarbagh, P.O., P.S. & District - Godda, Jharkhand.
180. Rohit Kumar, son of Durga Charan Mishra, resident of P.O.-
Pupunki Asharam, P.S.-Chas Mu & District- Bokaro,
Jharkhand.
181. Sailesh Kumar Mohli, son of Tulsi Mohli, resident of Village-
Akdoni Khurid, P.O.- Beniadih, P.S.- Giridih, & District- Giridih,
Jharkhand.
182. Prabhat Ranjan, son of Yaswant Prasad, resident of
Village- Bandar, P.O. & P.S.- Bishrampur & District Palamu,
Jharkhand.
183. Rajesh Kumar, son of Bijay Das, resident of House No. 98,
Ward No. 6, P.O. & P.S.- Madhupur, Gram Panchayat -
Bherwa & District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.
184. Suman Kumari, daughter of Ashok Kumar, resident of
Dushad Mohalla, P.O & P.S. - Ramgarh & District -Ramgarh,
Jharkhand.
185. Prasanjeet Kumar, son of Ram Pratap Prasad, resident of
Staff Quarter Netarhat Residential School, Amtipani, P.O., P.S.
& District - Gumla, Jharkhand.
186. Bikash Kumar Pandey, son of Brajmohan Pandey, resident
of Ward No. 03, Village- Singhitali, P.O. -Chapari, P.S.-
Bhawanathpur, District-Gharwa, Jharkhand.
187. Mukesh Kumar Ray, son of Umesh Ray, resident of
Bankarnali, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar, Jharkhand.
188. Abhishek Kumar, son of Murari Prasad Choudhary, resident
of Village- Bhurkunda, Lohoriya, P.O., P.S. & District -
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
189. Rockey Kumar Rajak, son of Sunil Kumar Rajak, resident of
Ward No. 19, Near Kali Mandir, June Bandh P.O., P.S. &
District- Deoghar, Jharkhand.
190. Manish Kumar Singh, son of Dipnarayan Singh, resident of
P.O. & P.S.- Sarwan, Kapsio, Baijukaruwa, 27 years & District
- Deoghar, Jharkhand.
191. Prabhat Gyan, son of Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, resident of
Village- Jirulia, Chanddih P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
192. Pallav Kumar, son of Shyam Pyare Mishra, resident of Ward
No. 34, Castairs Town, Santhal Pahariya Sewa Mandal, P.O.,
P.S. & District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.
193. Sudhanshu Prasad, son of Ram Prasad Singh, resident of
13A, Ajabraydih, P.O. & P.S.- Kunda, Chanddih, District -
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
194. Vinay Kumar, son of Sarjun Panjiyara, resident of
10
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Panchayat- Morney, Village & P.O.-T. Basdiha, P.S. -
Mohanpur, District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.
195. Pankaj Kumar Yadav, son of Jay Narayan Yadav, resident of
Village- Jharkhandi Jamunia, P.O. & P.S.-Kunda & District -
Deoghar, Jharkhand.
196. Ranjeet Prakash Rajak, son of Bhubneshwar Prasad Rajak,
resident of Katharatanr, P.O.- Hariharpur, P.S.- Taljhari &
District - Dumka, Jharkhand.
197. Vinay Prakash, son of Ratan Kumar Jha, resident of House
No. 89, Ward No. 24, B. N. Jha, Near St. Columbas School
Bilasi, Nilkanthpur, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar, Jharkhand.
198. Ram Kumar Deo, son of Lalit Prasad Deo, resident of Near
Hanuman Mandir, Village- Kushmaha, Panchayat- Sarsa, Via-
Deogha, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar, Jharkhand.
199. Sankar Pandit, son of Gendo Pandit, resident of Panchayat-
Ahilyapur, Block- Gandey, Gram & P.S.- Ahilyapur, P.O.-
Bengabad & District- Giridih, Jharkhand.
200. Ganesh Kumar Ray, son of Laljeet Ray, resident of Village-
Ghorchanchi, P.O.- Pirtand, P.S.- Pirtand & District- Giridih,
Jharkhand.
201. Sachin Kumar, son of Murali Ram, resident of Near Middle
School, Gadisirampur, P.O.- Gadi Srirampur, P.S.- Giridih &
District - Giridih.
202. Santosh Kumar Ram, son of Bachu Lal Ram, resident of
Gadisirampur, P.O. - Gadi Srirampur, P.S.- Giridih & District -
Giridih.
203. Vivek Kumar Ranjan, son of Nand Kishore Roy, resident of
Parwati Niwas, Krishna Nagar, Behind Carmel School,
Alkapuri, P.O. & P.S.-Giridih, District Giridih.
204. Manoj Kumar Saw, son of Dharmu Saw, resident of
Village- Jaspur, Panchayat - Jaspur, P.O.- Gadi Srirampur, P.S.-
Giridih & District - Giridih.
205. Uday Kumar Singh, son of Naresh Singh, resident of
Village - Chunglo, P.O. - Gadi Srirampur, P.S.- Giridih &
District - Giridih.
206. Bhuneshwar Prasad Verma, son of Badri Mahto, resident of
Village- Bhalua, P.O.- Saranda, P.S. -Birni & District - Giridih.
207. Prakash Kumar, son of Rajendra Mahto, resident of Village-
Bhalua, Panchayat - Manjhidih, Block -Birni, P.O.- Saranda,
P.S. Birni & District - Giridih.
208. Mukesh Kumar, son of Kaleshwar Prasad Verma, resident
of Village- Bhalua, Panchayat- Manjhidih, Block Birni, P.O.-
Saranda, P.S.- Birni & District - Giridih.
209. Anil Yadav, son of Jayprakash Yadav, resident of Village-
Kenduwa 2, P.O. & P.S.- Chalkusa & District - Hazaribagh.
210. Navlesh Kumar Yadav, son of Jageshwar Yadav, resident
of Village - Bero Kalan Alias Bero, P.O. -Berokala, P.S. -
Barkattha & District - Hazaribagh.
211. Bhola Kumar Mahto, son of Narayan Mahto, resident of
Village- Jamtara, Panchayat - Jamtara, P.O.- Jamtara, P.S.-
Giridih & District - Giridih.
212. Nitish Kumar, son of Niraj Kumar Das, resident of Village-
11
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Mansadih (Hadhada), P.O. & P.S. - Chandouri, District -
Giridih.
213. Ankit Kumar, son of Saryu Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.
- Siyatand, P.S. - Jamua, District - Giridih
214. Kumar Vivek, son of Arun Prasad, resident of 37, Mandai
Tola, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. -Khetko, P.S.- Bagodar & District
- Giridih.
215. Rishikesh Kumar Mehta, son of Shiv Prasad Mehta,
resident of Village & P.O. - Gunja, P.S.- Ichak & District -
Hazaribagh.
216. Kailash Prasad Mehta, son of Shiv Prasad Mehta, resident
of Village & P.O.- Gunja, P.S. -Ichak & District - Hazaribagh,
217. Loknath Prasad, son of Tribhuwan Prasad, resident of
Village- Bara, P.O.- Atka, P.S. Bishnugarh & District-
Hazaribagh.
218. Arvind Kumar, son of Rajendra Mahto, resident of Village-
Garri Kalan, P.O.- Garikala, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District-
Hazaribagh.
219. Purushotam Kumar, son of Baleshwar Rana, resident of
Village - Garri Kalan, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, District-
Hazaribagh.
220. Sanjeet Singh, son of Manager Singh, resident of Village -
Shandih, Near L.B. College, P.O.- Shandih, P.S.- Giridih &
District - Giridih.
221. Ranjan Kumar, son of Tarun Kumar, resident of Village-
Pihra Manpur, P.O. & P.S.- Gawan, District - Giridih.
222. Niranjan Kumar, son of Doman Gope, resident of Village-
Masratu, P.O.- Rewali, P.S.- Katkamdag & District -
Hazaribagh.
223. Vikash Kumar, son of Ramdeo Mahto, resident of Village &
P.O.- Sapamaran, P.S.- Giridih, & District - Giridih.
224. Gautam Poddar, son of Narayan Poddar, resident of Village
- Sagarbhanga, P.O. - Baskupi, P.S. - Deoghar & District -
Deoghar.
225. Kapil Bhogta, son of Narayan Ganjhu, resident of Village-
Charhi Basti, P.O. & P.S.- Charhi, District - Hazaribagh.
226. Nikita Kumari, daughter of Rakesh Rajak, resident of
Deepak Kumar Baitha, Chhauni Toli, Village- Jhiko Chatti, P.O.
& P.S.- Bharno, District- Lohardaga.
227. Nidhika Kumari, daughter of Arjun Saw, resident of
Village- Kathoutiya, P.O. - Dantokhurd, P.S.- Katkamsandi &
District - Hazaribagh.
228. Rakhi Kumari, daughter of Kishori Mohan Prasad, resident
of Village- Basobar, P.O. & P.S.- Daru, District - Hazaribagh
229. Pankaj Kumar, son of Tulsi Prasad Sahu, resident of 34,
Bhutahi Murgaon, P.O. & P.S.- Bishnugarh, District -
Hazaribagh.
230. Suraj Marandi, son of Rejenal Marandi, resident of Village-
Shri Ram Chowki, P.O. Mahadevganj, P.S.Sahebganj &
District - Sahebganj.
231. Lakshmi Kumari, daughter of Ram Bhajan Ram, resident of
Kunal Kumar, Michyari Lane Het Tola, Dewangna Chowk, P.O.
12
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
& P.S.- Korrah, District Hazaribagh.
232. Sanjay Saw, son of Hiraman Saw, resident of Ward No.
06, Village, Panchayat & P.O.- Naitand, P.S. - Jainagar, District
- Koderma.
233. Ragini Kumari, daughter of Jiwan Chandra Azad, resident
of Village- Kharika, P.O. - Dhangada, P.S. -Tandwa, District -
Chatra.
234. Basant Yadav, son of Ram Sahay Yadav, resident of Village
& P.O.- Darha, P.S. - Latehar & District Latehar.
235. Binay Kumar, son of Ram Bhajan Ram, resident of Village -
Narshigh Sthan Banha, P.O.- Banha, P.S.- Hazaribagh &
District - Hazaribagh.
236. Ashutosh Kumar Dubey, son of Prakash Dubey, resident of
39, Village & P.O. - Tilra, P.S. Hazaribagh & District -
Hazaribagh.
237. Ashwani Kumar Pandey, son of Satyanarayan Pandey,
resident of Village & P.O. - Biaria, P.S. - Giridih & District -
Giridih.
238. Akash Kumar Dubey, son of Prakash Dubey, resident of
Village & P.O.- Tilra, P.S. Hazaribagh & District - Hazaribagh
239. Vikash Kumar, son of Ranjeet Modi, resident of Village -
Palounjla, Block - Birni, P.O. - Palaunjia, P.S.- Giridih & District
- Giridih.
240. Arvind Kumar, son of Sukhi Mahto, resident of Village &
P.O.- Lochar, P.S.-Hazaribagh & District - Hazaribagh.
241. Shobha Kumari, daughter of Kameshwar Saw, resident of
Village- Serandag, P.O - Bagra More, P.S. - Chatra & District
- Chatra.
242. Sunil Kumar Das, son of Baldeo Das, resident of Village-
Choudharydih, Panchayat - Nawadih, Block- Suriya, P.O.-
Sabalpur, P.S.- Suriya & District- Giridih.
243. Meghnath Yadav, son of Ojir Yadav, resident of Village-
Bhatbigha, P.O.- Selhara Kala, P.S.- Gobindpur alias Gondpur
& District - Hazaribagh.
244. Amit Kumar Rana, son of Kishori Rana, resident of Village
- Baheri, Near Chano Petrol Pump, P.O.-Oria,P.S.- Hazaribagh
& District - Hazaribagh.
245. Teklal Kumar, son of Devnath Mahto, resident of Village &
P.O- Kutulua, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District - Hazaribagh.
246. Sanjay Sharma, son of Baldeo Thakur, resident of Village-
Kharkhari, P.O.- Jawahar Nagar, P.S.- Birni, & District -
Giridih.
247. Chandan Kumar Paswan, son of Sukhdev Paswan, resident
of Village - Chondhitand, Panchayat - Kendua, Block-
Dhanwar, P.O.- Orkhar, P.S.- Dhanwar, & District - Giridih.
248. Vikash Kumar Paswan, son of Deonandan Ram, resident of
Village- Bonga, P.O. & P.S.- Bariyat, District - Hazaribagh
249. Anuj Kumar, son of Bajrangi Prajapati, resident of Village-
Bhushad, P.O. & P.S.- Lawalong, District - Chatra.
250. Indradeo Kumar, son of Shambhu Ram, resident of Village
- Pindar Kon, P.O.- Gauria Karma, P.S. -Hazaribagh & District
- Hazaribagh.
13
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
251. Chandan Kumar, son of Sakaldeo Choudhary, resident of
Village - Baghanal, Panchayat - Kharkhari, Block- Birni, P.O.-
Jawaharnagar, P.S.- Birni & District- Giridih.
252. Amardeep Thakur, son of Umesh Thakur, resident of
Pratappur, Jogiara, P.O.- Jogiara, P.S.- Chatra & District -
Chatra.
253. Saket Bhartiy, son of Sailesh Bhartiy, resident of Village -
Sisai, P.O. - Sirsai, P.S. Chatra & District - Chatra.
254. Mithlesh Kumar, son of Bindev Yadav, resident of Village-
Kukurman, Panchayat & P.O. - Yogiyara, P.S. - Pratappur &
District - Chatra.
255. Sanjan Kumar Yadav, son of Arjun Prasad Yadav, resident
of Village-Koni, P.O.- Malda, P.S.- Gawan & District - Giridih
256. Vibhuti Paswan, son of Chhathan Paswan, resident of
Village - Nawadih, Panchayat - Sijua, P.O.- Jogiyara, P.S.-
Pratappur & District - Chatra.
257. Deepak Kumar, son of Lalan Paswan, resident of Village-
Mahugai, Jogidih, P.O.- Yadavnagar, P.S.- Chatra & District -
Chatra.
258. Vishesh Singh, son of Baleshwar Singh, resident of Village-
Padriya, Panchayat - Dondlo, Block- Bagodar, P.O.- Dondlo,
P.S.- Bagodar, & District - Giridih.
259. Madhu Kumari, daughter of Basudeo Saw, resident of
Ward No. 2, Pathalgada, Madangundi, P.O. & P.S.- Chandwara
& District- Koderma.
260. Mukesh Kumar, son of Ramchandra Prasad, resident of
Village- Naitand, P.O.- Naitanr, P.S.- Koderma & District-
Koderma .
261. Sunil Kujur, son of Selvester Kujur, resident of 01 Birsa
Tola, Matwari, P.O.- Hazaribagh, P.S.- Sadar & District-
Hazaribagh.
262. Saraswati Kumari, daughter of Ramlakhan Saw, resident of
Village- Bara, P.O. & P.S.- Chatra & District- Chatra.
263. Sudhanshu Vishwakarma, son of Binod Kumar
Vishwakarma, resident of Village & P.O.- Mandramo, P.S.-
Suriyan & District- Giridih
264. Pankaj Kumar, son of Sahdeo Prasad Yadav, resident of
Village- Badano, P.O.- Maskedih, P.S.- Chalkusha, & District-
Hazaribagh.
265. Piyush Tigga, son of Poresh Tigga, resident of Village-
Lakhe, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh & District- Hazazibagh
266. Sunil Kumar, son of Suresh Saw, resident of Village-
Pindra, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O.- Tapin, P.S.- Ramgarh & District
- Ramgarh.
267. Binod Kumar Rana, son of Bhikhari Rana, resident of
Ward No. 01, Village- Nawdiha, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh,
District - Hazaribagh.
268. Sunil Kumar, son of Ramswarup Gope, resident of Village-
Sindur, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh & District - Hazaribagh
269. Prakash Sahu, son of Ranthu Sahu, resident of Village-
Kulhai, P.O.- Khatanga, P.S.- Rania & District Khunti.
270. Golden Kumar, son of Naresh Ram, resident of Lepo Road,
14
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Ravi Nagar, P.O. - Hazaribagh, P.S. -Sadar & District -
Hazaribagh.
271. Sindhu Mala, daughter of Devnarayan Mehta, resident of
Village- Bonga, P.O.- Bariyath, P.S.-Ichak & District -
Hazaribagh.
272. Ravindra Kumar Paswan, son of Ramvilas Paswan, resident
of Village- Dhab, P.O.- Manjhiladih, P.S.- Birni & District-
Giridih.
273. Anupraj Shekhar, son of Dinesh Prasad, resident of
Village- Jharpo, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O.- Jharpo, P.S.- Ichak &
District - Hazaribagh.
274. Vivek Kumar Singh, son of Binod Singh, resident of Village-
Chano, P.O.- Oria, P.S. - Hazaribagh & District - Hazaribagh
275. Shivam Kumar Singh, son of Ranjeet Singh, resident of
Village- Balia, P.O.- Kutipisi, P.S.- Katkamnsandi & District -
Hazaribagh.
276. Gultan Kumar Sahu, son of Dineshwar Prasad Sahu,
resident of Village- Ukharsal, P.O.- Kurhobindo, P.S.- Jamua &
District - Giridih.
277. Binay Kumar, son of Biltu Prasad Mehta, resident of
Village - Barka Kalan, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, District-
Hazaribagh.
278. Ravikant Kumar, son of Parmeshwar Pandit, resident of
Village - Domhan, P.O. - Kishutand, P.S. -Giridih & District -
Giridih.
279. Appu Kumar, son of Kamaldeo Singh, resident of Village-
Nawada, P.O. & P.S.- Chatra, District-Chatra.
280. Akash Kumar Singh, son of Abhay Singh, resident of House
No. WZ 13J, Gali No.- 2, Pankha Road, Vasistha Park, Sagar
Pur, Nangal Raya, P.O. & P.S.- South West, District - Delhi
281. Purushottam Kumar Singh, son of Rambriksh Singh,
resident of Village -Tilra, P.O. & P.S.- Mayurhand, District -
Chatra.
282. Laloo Prasad Yadav, son of Lal.i Prasad Yadav, resident of
Village- Mahatha Khaira, Panchayat- Shivpur, P.O. & P.S.-
Satgawan, District- Koderma.
283. Baldeo Yadav, son of Rameshwar Yadav, resident of
Village- Bandutta Fulwaria, P.O.-Bagro, P.S.- Koderma &
District - Koderma.
284. Sangeeta Kumari, daughter of Faudi Yadav, resident of
Village- Slaiya, Ward No. 07, Ρ.Ο.- Pathaldiha, P.S. - Koderma
& District - Koderma.
285. Vijay Kumar, son of Ramsahay Yadav, resident of Ward No.
6, P.O.- Pathaldiha, P.S. - Koderma & District-Koderma
286. Kapildeo Yadav, son of Birendra Yadav, resident of Ward
No. - 03, Village - Chiglabar, P.O. -Bekobar, P.S.- Koderma &
District - Koderma.
287. Narayan Rajwar, son of Kartik Rajwar, resident of Village -
Jainamore Side, P.O. - Jainamore, P.S.- Jaridih & District -
Bokaro.
288. Akshay Kumar Gupta, son of Sambhu Prasad Gupta,
resident of Village-Chatti, Bariyatu, P.O.- Chatti, P.S.- Bariyatu
15
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
& District - Hazaribagh.
289. Laxman Kumar, son of Rajeshwar Kumar, resident of Baba
Path, Anand Vihar, Gali No. - 6, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District -
Hazaribagh.
290. Adarsh Kumar Ravi, son of Ram Ballav Ram, resident of
Village & P.O.- Dari, P.S. Kanki & District - Hazaribagh.
291. Pawan Kumar Yadav, son of Ramlal Prasad Yadav, resident
of Village- Akdoni Kala, P.O.- Akdoni Kalan, P.S.- Giridih
(Mufassil) & District - Giridih.
292. Satyam Kumar, son of Pradeep Kumar Singh, resident of
Village- Ranik, P.O.- Bela, P.S.- Chouparan & District -
Hazaribagh.
293. Ashish Kumar, son of Umesh Prasad Soni, resident of
Ward No. 4, Village- Mandai Khurd, P.O.- Reformetry School,
P.S. - Hazaribagh & District-Hazaribagh.
294. Uday Kumar, son of Nageshwar Prasad Mehta, resident of
Village- Ghaghra Khurd, P.O.- Punai, P.S.- Hazaribagh &
District - Hazaribagh.
295. Anil Kumar Yadav, son of Banshi Mahto, resident of
Village- Barano Maskedih, P.O. & P.S.- Barkatha, District -
Hazaribagh.
296. Sudhir Kumar Yadav, son of Prabhu Yadav, resident of
Ward No. 3, Village- Chiglabar, P.O.- Bekobar, P.S. Koderma &
District - Koderma.
297. Swet Nisha, daughter of Dilip Kumar Sharma, resident of
Village- Lengrappar, P.O. & P.S.- Domchanch, District -
Koderma.
298. Ashutosh Kumar, son of Nirpat Prasad, resident of Village
& Panchayat - Khetako, Block -Bagodar, P.O. - Khetako, P.S.
Bagodar & District - Giridih.
299. Ankit Kumar, son of Ajay Kumar, resident of Village-
Darudih, P.O. & P.S.- Daru, District - Hazaribagh.
300. Ravi Roshan Kumar, son of Ajeet Kumar, resident of
Village- Berho, P.O. & P.S.- Tatijhariya, District - Hazaribagh
301. Sushil Kumar, son of Umesh Prasad, resident of Village-
Darudih, P.Ο.- Daroo, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District -
Hazaribagh.
302. Pawan Kumar, son of Amrit Prasad, resident of Panchayat-
Khetko, Block- Bagodar, Village & P.O.- Khetko, P.S.- Bagodar
& District - Giridih
303. Shakti Kumar Mandal, son of Shiv Shanker Prasad Mandal,
resident of Panchayat- Sasarkho, Block- Dumri, Village-
Kushto Nawadih, P.O.- Naitand, P.S.- Dumri & District- Giridih.
304. Komal Kumari, daughter of Aditya Prasad, resident of
Village & P.O.-Pancha, P.S.- Ormanjhi & District- Ranchi
305. Abhishek Kumar, son of Ramsunder Prasad Mandal,
resident of 345 G, Korra Road, Dhobia Talab More, P.O.-
College More, P.S.- Sadar & District- Hazaribagh.
306. Bhagirath Mandal, son of Hari Mandal, resident of
Panchayat- Mandramo East, Block- Suriya, Village- Khairabad,
P.O.- Mandramo, P.S.- Suriya & District- Giridih.
307. Jitendra Kumar Rana, son of Awadh Rana, resident of
16
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Village- Dodhi, P.O.- Madhniya, P.S.- Dorhi & District - Chatra.
308. Gorelal Yadav, son of Kokil Yadav, resident of Village -
Karakhut, P.O.- Bagro, P.S.- Koderma & District - Koderma.
309. Sunny Kumar, son of Din Dayal Shahu, resident of 266,
K.B. Marg, Kani Bazar, P.O.- Hazaribag, P.S. -Sadar & District
- Hazaribagh.
310. Amit Kumar Chandravanshi, son of Prabhu Ram, resident
of 334, Kani Bazar, Munka Bagicha Road, P.O.- Hazaribag,
P.S.- Sadar & District - Hazaribagh.
311. Sonu Kumar, son of Dilip Yadav, resident of Thana- Brahi,
Village & P.O. Purhara, P.S.- Rasoiyadhamna & District -
Hazaribagh
312. Subodh Kumar, son of Birendra Pandit, resident of Village
& P.O- Tetariadih, P.S.- Koderma & District- Koderma.
313. Mayank Kumar Gupta, son of Sunil Ram, resident of
Panchayat, Block, Village, P.O. & P.S.- Gandey , District
Giridih.
314. Sangita Kumari, daughter of Rameshwar Oraon, resident
of 12, Rahamatnagar, Kharika, P.O.- Dhangada, P.S.- Tandwa
& District - Chatra.
315. Ash Kerketta, son of Dhaneshwar Kerketta, resident of
Village- Bahoranpur, Churchu Road, P.O.- Chandwar, P.S.-
Hazaribagh & District - Hazaribagh.
316. Amit Kumar, son of Bal Govind Ram, resident of 25,
Chalkusha, P.O.- Chalkusha, P.S.- Hazaribagh & District -
Hazaribagh.
317. Pappu Kumar Gupta, son of Sudama Prasad Gupta,
resident of Ward No.- 7, Village- Amhar Khas, P.O.- Kocheya,
P.S.- Nagar Untari & District - Garhwa.
318. Deepak Kumar Verma, son of Sarju Prasad Verma, resident
of Village - Balidih, P.O.- Baddiha, P.S.- Hirodih & District -
Giridih.
319. Aryan Kumar, son of Mahendra Ray, resident of Village-
Mahtotand, P.O.- Mirzaganj, P.S.- Jamua & District - Giridih
320. Sonu Prasad Kushwaha, son of Mahesh Kushwaha,
resident of Village- Ratanpur, P.O.- Arkhango, P.S.- Dhanwar
& District - Giridih.
321. Satrughan Kumar Soni, son of Sudama Devi, resident of
44, P.O. & P.S.- Jhumri Telaiya, Bypass Road, District -
Koderma.
322. Ravi Shankar Singh, son of Bandhu Singh, resident of
Village & P.O.- Demu, P.S.- Latehar & District Latehar.
323. Afaque Ahmad, son of Md. Ibrahim, resident of House No.
786, Chhota Talab, Near Nagma Store, Mojahid Nagar, Hind
Piri, P.O., G.P.O- Ranchi, P.S.-Sukhdeonagar & District-
Ranchi.
324. Uday Pratap Mahto, son of Sohari Mahto, resident of Opp.
Shiv Mandir, Village - Mesra, P.O.- Neori Vikash, P.S.- Sadar &
District - Ranchi.
325. Md. Mokarram Jaya, son of Md. Naim Uddin, resident of
Village & P.O.- Tetrain, P.S.- Panki, District - Palamu.
326. Vikas Kumar Mahto, son of Subhas Mahto, resident of
17
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Village- Baradih, P.O.- Bandhdih, P.S.- Jaridih & District -
Bokaro.
327. Deepak Kumar, son of Hemlal Pandit, resident of Near
Birbal Kirana Store, Sarna Toli, P.S.-Kokar, P.O., G.P.O.- Ranchi
& District - Ranchi.
328. Vimal Kumar, son of Balgobind Ram, resident of Village-
Dahugutu (Gajtand), P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District - Khunti.
329. Vikram Kumar Pandit, son of Rameshwar Pandit, resident
of Village- Kaindinagar, P.O.- Kolhaiya, P.S.- Rajpur & District
- Chatra.
330. John Ranjit Runda, son of Prakash Runda, resident of Near
Church Tati, P.O. & P.S.- Kuru, District - Lohardaga.
331. Sandeep Kumar Gupta, son of Rajendra Prasad Gupta,
resident of Village & P.O.- Tarhasi, P.S.- Palamu & District-
Palamu.
332. Rajeev Ranjan, son of Bhim Saw, resident of J.A.P. 4,
Sector 12, Bokaro Steel City, Marafari Colony, P.O. & P.S.-
Bokaro, District - Bokaro.
333. Ujjwal Kumar Yadav, son of Balkisun Yadav, resident of
Village - Rege, P.O. - Karge, P.S. - Ranchi & District- Ranchi
334. Dev Kumar Pandey, son of Naresh Pandey, resident of
Village & P.O.- Shankh, P.S.- Ganwan, District - Giridih.
335. Uttam Kumar Raj, son of Sudhir Prasad Verma, resident of
Village- Barmariya, P.O.- Chitra, P.S.- Deoghar & District-
Deoghar.
336. Satish Kumar Bhagat, son of Suren Kumar Bhagat,
resident of Village- Dhouta Toli Puggu, P.O.- Armai, P.S.-
Gumla & District - Gumla.
337. Kali Prasad Murmu, son of Ram Kumar Manjhi, resident of
House No. 350, P.O.- Champi, P.S. -Petarwar, Ambatola &
District- Bokaro.
338. Kundan Kumar, son of Sunil Kumar, resident of Village-
Chamardiha, P.O. & P.S.- Barwadih, District- Latehar.
339. Mithilesh Kumar Singh, son of Parmeshwar Singh, resident
of Village & P.O.- Baredih, P.S.- Tamar, District - Ranchi.
340. Deepu Kumar, son of Ram Lakhan Mahto, resident of Siyar
Toli, Itki West, Near Church, Itki Thakur Goan, P.O. & P.S.-
Itki, District - Ranchi.
341. August Bharti, son of Bipin Kumar Singh, resident of Q.
No.- DT- 2314, Tanki Side, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District -
Ranchi.
342. Ravi Shekhar, son of Uday Shankar Singh, resident of DT-
1696, Tank Side, HEC Colony, Sector 4, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa,
District - Ranchi.
343. Nitu Kumari, daughter of Khemlal Bedia, resident of Hesla
Tola, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O.- Hesia, P.S.- Argada & District-
Ramgarh.
344. Sunil Kumar, son of Basudeo Prasad Das, resident of
Village- Fatehpur, P.O.- Maniyadih, P.S.- Tundi, District-
Dhanbad.
345. Binod Kumar, son of Maheshwar Prasad, resident of Village
& P.O.- Khutta, P.S.- Satgawan, District - Koderma.
18
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
346. Nishit Kachhap, son of Krishna Oraon, resident of House
No.- 136, Tiril, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District - Ranchi.
347. Birendra Kumar, son of Gauri Shankar Das, resident of
Ward No.- 7, Village- Alagdiha, P.O.- Khariodih, P.S.- Jainagar
& District - Koderma.
348. Ujjawal Kumar Verma, son of Aditya Prasad Verma,
resident of Ganpati Enclave, Flat No.- 1B, Road No.- 4B,
Kusum Vihar, Morabadi, P.O. & P.S. - Morabadi, District -
Ranchi.
349. Jugesh Kumar Bediya, son of Sahdev Bediya, resident of
Village- Mishrain Morha, P.O.- Religarha, P.S.- Churchu &
District- Hazaribagh.
350. Krishnanand Pandey, son of Jayshanker Pandey, resident
of Panchayat- Bairiya, Village & P.O.- Bairiya, P.S.- Deori &
District - Giridih.
351. Adil Hussain, son of Md. Gulzar Hussain, resident of Village
& P.O.- Arita, P.S. Chandankiyari, District - Bokaro.
352. Vijay Kujur, son of Prakash Kujur, resident of Juria
Karamtoli, P.O.- Juria, P.S-. Lohardaga & District - Lohardaga
353. Birendra Kumar Thakur, son of Baldev Thakur, resident of
Village- Napokhurd, P.O.- Gossaibalia, P.S-. Barkagaon &
District - Hazaribagh.
354. Sonu Kumar Soni, son of Gopal Sav, resident of 32 Bank
More, Lari Bank Road, Lari Kalan, P.Ο.- Lari, P.S.- Ramgarh &
District - Ramgarh.
355. Mantu Kumar, son of Gopal Singh, resident of Village &
P.O.- Kataiya, P.S.- Satgawan, District- Koderma.
356. Subham Kumar, son of Karam Bhagat, resident of Village-
Tandwa, P.O. & P.S.- Tandwa, District - Chatra.
357. Nitin Kumar, son of Gyan Chand Sahu, resident of Chhitkal
Tola, P.O.- Sukurhuttu, P.S.- Kanke & District-Ranchi.
358. Pankaj Kumar, son of Shyam Nath Mahto, resident of
Village & P.O.- Sukurhuttu, P.S.- Kanke & District - Ranchi.
359. Roshan Kumar Gupta, son of Ganga Prashad Gupta,
resident of Pipra Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District - Khunti
360. Sandeep Kumar, son of Bijay Kumar, resident of Near Dam
Side, DT- 632, Sector- 9, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District -
Ranchi.
361. Deelip Kumar, son of Mohan Ram, resident of Namak
Factory Gali, Alkapuri, Ratu Road, P.O.- Ranchi GPO, P.S.-
Ranchi & District - Ranchi.
362. Saurav Kumar Sinha, son of Shailesh Kumar Sinha,
resident of C/O - Mahendra Prasad Singh, House No. 354,
Premnagar, Road No.- 6, Shanti Colony, Singh More, Hatiya,
P.O. & P.S.- Hatiya, District- Ranchi.
363. Nikhil Kumar, son of Ajit Kumar Singh, resident of Village &
P.O.- Bijaulli, P.S.- Aurangabad & District - Aurangabad
364. Sanjay Roshan Minj, son of Shobhnath Minj, resident of
Parswan Raje, P.O. & P.S.- Garhwa, District- Garhwa.
365. Rajesh Tudu, son of Ganesh Tudu, resident of Village-
Bagjhopa, P.O.- Tularam Bhuska, P.S.- Boarijore & District -
Godda.
19
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
366. Tiwari Oraon, son of Bahadur Oraon, resident of Village-
Bara, P.O.- Marangloiya, P.S.- Balumath & District - Latehar
367. Deepanshu Pandey, son of Vishwanath Pandey, resident of
Bagodih More, P.O. & P.S.- Sariya, District - Giridih.
368. Sarwan Kumar, son of Raj Kumar Saw, resident of
Mahadeo Talab Road, Whitty Bazar, P.O. & P.S.- Giridih,
District - Giridih.
369. Ujjwal Kumar Sinha, son of Subodh Kumar Sinha, resident
of Krishna Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Giridih, District- Giridih.
370. Purshotam Kumar, son of Ashok Singh, resident of Village-
Urro, P.O.- Sabalpur, P.S.- Suirya & District- Giridih.
371. Kundan Kumar, son of Krishna Nand Sharma, resident of
New Barganda, West of Ashram, P.O. & P.S.- Giridih, District-
Giridih.
372. Brahmadeo Kumar, son of Nunulal Yadav, resident of
Village- Ambatand, P.O.- Kurhobindo, P.S.- Jamua & District -
Giridih.
373. Anil Kishku, son of Budhan Kisku, resident of Village-
Tetariya, P.O.- Baddiha, P.S.- Giridih (Mufassil) & District -
Giridih.
374. Ashish Kumar Mandal, son of Jay Prakash Mandal, resident
of Village- Nawadih, P.O.- Chunglo, P.S.- Jamua & District -
Giridih.
375. Faiyaz Ansari, son of Md. Amir Husain, resident of Village-
Kharpoka, P.O.-Khukhra, P.S.-Pirtand & District- Giridih.
376. Pooja Rana, daughter of Jiwadhan Rana, resident of
Village - Jarmune Purvi Gram Manjhiladih, P.O. & P.S.-
Bagodar, District - Giridih.
377. Chandrashekhar Ram, son of Mungeshwar Ram, resident
of Village & P.O. - Ganeshpur, P.S.- Balumath & District -
Latehar.
378. Dilip Kumar, son of Sita Ram, resident of Village- Basdiha,
P.O.- Dandar, P.S.- Dandar Kala & District - Palamu.
379. Pawan Kumar Ram, son of Rameshwar Ram, resident of
Panchayat, P.O. & P.S.- Taratand, District - Giridih.
380. Tara Kumar Ram, son of Jagdish Ram, resident of P.O.-
Umedanda, P.S.- Burmu & District - Ranchi.
381. Annu Kumari, daughter of Khageshwar Mahto, resident of
Mahto Tola, Teliyatu, Barkakana, P.O.- Barkakana, P.S.-
Ramgarh & District - Ramgarh.
382. Bablu Kumar Gupta, son of Satyanarayan Gupta, resident
of Near Surya Mandir, Sarovar Nagar Dam Side, P.O.- Hehal,
P.S.- Sukhdev Nagar & District - Ranchi.
383. Praveen Kumar, son of Chandradeep Singh, resident of
Keshav Kunj, Sunder Nagar, Near ITI Bus Stand, P.O.- Hehal,
P.S.- Sukhdev Nagar & District - Ranchi.
384. Aayush Vaibhav, son of Rajendra Kumar Sinha, resident of
House No. 122, Before Devalaya Mandir, Lower Burdwan
Compound, Lalpur, P.O.- Ranchi GPO, P.S.- Lalpur & District -
Ranchi.
385. Savita Kumari, daughter of Pradeep Prasad Mehta,
resident of Piskanagri, Tikra Toli, P.O.- Piska, P.S.- Ranchi &
20
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
District - Ranchi
386. Rajeev Kumar Sinha, son of Gulab Prasad Sinha, resident
of Ratu Road, Near Jharkhand. Public School, Lakshmi Nagar,
P.O.- Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdev Nagar & District - Ranchi.
387. Priyanka Rani, daughter of Late Shiv Kumar Pandey,
resident of Maya Devi, Near Power House, C.T.O. Road, P.O.
& P.S.- Dhurwa, District - Ranchi.
388. Vikash Gupta, son of Suraj Prasad Gupta, resident of
House No.- 125, HEC Colony, Sector - 2, P.O. & P.S. -
Dhurwa, District - Ranchi.
389. Ashutosh Kumar, son of Uma Shankar Manjhi, resident of
Village- Pokhraha Khurd, Rajwadih, P.O.- Rajwadih, P.S.-
Satbarwa & District - Palamu.
390. Prakash Kumar Yadav, son of Rajendra Yadav, resident of
Village- Titlangi, P.O.- Loharasi, P.S.- Pipratand & District -
Palamu.
391. Kaushal Kishor, son of Parshu Ram Mahto, resident of
Village- Darudih, P.O. Sangbar, P.S. -Lesliganj & District -
Palamu.
392. Namita Kumari, daughter of Nagendra Pathak, resident of
Flat No.- 201, Madhusudan Apartment, Dimna Road, Mango,
Near MGM Medical College, P.O. & P.S. - Mango, District -
Pashchimi Singhbhum.
393. Sunita Mahto, daughter of Santosh Mahto, resident of
Village & P.O.- Kothadih, P.S.- Ranchi & District - Ranchi
394. Suraj Kumar Linda, son of Birsa Oraon, resident of House
No.- 127, Village- Boreya, Tinkoniya Bazar, P.O.- Boreya, P.S.-
Kanke & District- Ranchi.
395. Manoranjan Kumar, son of Pramod Singh, resident of
Village & P.O.- Sonpura, P.S.- Tarhasi & District - Palamu
396. Awadhesh Kumar, son of Krishna Mistri, resident of Village-
Bhauraj, Panchayat- Humajang, P.O. & P.S.- Pratappur,
District - Chatra.
397. Shiv Charan Hansda, son of Mathura Hansda, resident of
Village- Gohalmara, Chandrapur, Baharagora, P.O.-
Baharagora, P.S.- Chandrapur & District -East Singhbhum.
398. Madhu Prasad, daughter of Suraj Saw, resident of Village-
Kudrum, P.O.- Bisrampur, P.S.- Ranka & District- Garhwa.
399. Parwez Hayat, son of Nasim Uddin, resident of House No.-
5, Village- Rewat Kala, P.O.- Matnog, P.S.- Latehar & District -
Latehar.
400. Ritu Rajak, son of Chandar Rajak, resident of Village-
Lohandi Khurd, P.O.- Lohandi, P.S.- Chauparan & District -
Hazaribagh.
401. Allam Ansari, son of Ajmudin Ansari, resident of Tetrain
Bazar, Village, P.O. & P.S. Tetrain, District-Palamu.
402. Akash Tigga, son of Sambhu Tigga, resident of Late
Sambhu Tigga, Village- Makhmandro, P.O & P.S- Ratu,
Ranchi, Jharkhand.
403. Kamal Kishor, son of Arvind kumar Roy resident of Village
- Sugga Pahari, P.O. & P.S.- Madhupur, Deoghar Jharkhand.
404. Komal Kumari, daughter of Prahlad Mahto, resident of
21
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Karra Road Nawa Toli, P.O. & P.S. & District Khunti
Jharkhand.
405. Sumit Kumar, son of Prahlad Chandra Mahto, resident of
Khunti, Nawatoli, Kara Road, Khunti, P.O, P.S. & Dist.- Khunti.
406. Deepshikha Kumari, daughter of Satish Kumar, resident of
Village- Bhauraj, Panchayat- Humajang, P.O.- Pratappur,
Bhaunraj, P.O., P.S. & District-Chatra.
407. Nujhat Tabassum, daughter of Yusuf Ansari, resident of
Village- PAKDIH P.O.-BENA, P.S.- JAMTARA, Jamtara,
Jharkhand.
408. Arbind Kumar, son of Bijendra Ram, resident of Village-
Bandla, P.O.- Kutmu, P.S.- Pandu, Palamu Jharkhand.
409. Raju Mahto, son of Nanku Mahto , resident of Doriya Toli,
Balalong, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi.
410. Anand Kumar Yadav, son of Karmani Yadav, resident of
Panchayat - Chungalkhar, Block- Jamua Village- Chungalkhar,
P.O.- Bhandaro, P.S.- Hirodih, Giridih Jharkhand.
411. Harish Ranjan, son of Barhan Ram Dangi, resident of
Purna dih, chhotki Pona, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi.
412. Rahul Kumar, son of Vijay Kumar resident of Tumbagara
Near Navjivan hospital, Village- Tumbagara, P.O.- Rankikala,
P.O.- Satbarwa, District-Palamu Jharkhand.
413. Prateek Toppo, son of Late Dinesh Toppo , resident of
Near Akhara Karam Toli, Morabadi, Ranchi, Jharkhand, P.O.,
P.S. & District-Ranchi.
414. Sabita Khalkho, daughter of Baijnath Khalkho, resident of
Near Railway Line, Daud Nagar, Dibadih, Ranchi, Jharkhand,
P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi.
415. Ratan Kumar Singh, son of Anil Prasad Singh, resident of
773, bhagalpur road mission hospital side by mission
hospital, satya nagar, Godda, P.O., P.S. & District-Godda.
416. Harish Pandit, son of Sukhdeo Pandit, resident of
jarmuney pacshmi bagodar, Gram- Sonturpi, Post- Jarmuney,
Thana- Bagodar, Giridih, Jharkhand.
417. Bhupendra Pandit, son of Basudeo Pandit, resident of
Jarmuney Pacshmi Bagodar, Gram- Sonturpi, P.O.- Jarmuney,
P.S.- Bagodar & District- Giridih.
418. Sunil Oraon, son of Bigal Oraon, resident of Jilingserang,
Guridih, Ranchi, jon R.s, Ranchi, Jharkhand, P.O., P.S. &
District-Ranchi.
419. Golden Prasad, son of Jay Ram Prasad, resident of Village-
Kasiya, P.O.- Jhabar, P.S.- Daltonganj, District-Palamu,
Jharkhand.
420. Pritam Kujur, son of Luthru Oraon, resident of Amliya Pipar
Toli, Amliya Kalyanpur, Amalia, verno, Gumla, Jharkhand,
P.O., P.S. & District-Gumla.
421. Vinita Kumari, daughter of Ramchandra Jasiwal, resident
of Sanjay Kumar Bhagat, Village & P.o- Taimara, P.S.-
Dashamfall, & District-Ranchi.
422. Shubham Kumar, son of Vidya Sagar Mehta, resident of
town no-2, Village- Kumhar toli, redma, P.S.- Medninagar,
redma dakshini, P.O. & P.S.- Daltonganj, District-Palamu
22
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Jharkhand.
423. Rakesh Kumar, son of Mohan Mochi, resident of Graam -
Soparam, P.O.- Saradhu, P.S.- Tandwa , District-Chatra,
Jharkhand.
424. Rakesh Kumar Mahto, son of Shuddheshwer Mahto,
resident of P.S.- Sonahatu, P.O.-Oraondih, District-Ranchi,
Jharkhand.
425. Sweta Pradhan, son of Krishna Mistri, resident of Village-
Bhauraj Panchayat-Humajang, P.O., P.S. & District-Chatra.
426. Braj Kishor Mahto, son of Laldeo Mahto, resident of 275,
Bhelwa Tand, Churi, Karkadih, Ranchi, P.O., P.S. & District-
Ranchi.
427. Lal Vijay Anand Shahdeo, son of Lal Birbal Nath Shahdeo,
resident of Village- Lohagara, P.O.- Lodhma Thana- Karra,
Khunti, Jharkhand, P.O., P.S. & District-Khunti.
428. Haresh Chandra Patar, son of Rajballave Patar, resident of
Arbind .i Das, Sanjay Nagar Colony, Block ke Pass, P.O. &
P.S.- Ratu, & District-Ranchi.
429. Sanjeev Kumar Mahto, son of Sachit Kumar Mahto,
resident of Gaon- Belposh, P.O.- Tunia, Block- Sonua,
Panchayat- Baljori, Goilkera, P.O., P.S. & District-West
Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
430. Navin Kumar, son of Brijkishor Thakur, resident of Village-
Dhatiwana, Gopalganj, P.O., P.S. & District-Gopalganj.
431. Ashutosh Kumar Tiwary, son of Baban Tiwary, resident of
C/O- Ambika Prasad, LTR, Amprit Gope, Nandgaon, Shastri
Nagar, P.O.- L.B.S. Nagar, P.S.- Patna & District- Patna
432. Rahul Kumar Mahato, son of Navin Kumar, resident of
Village- Madhuban New Colony, P.O.- Madhuban, P.S.-
Dhanbad & District - Dhanbad
433. Khushboo Kumari, daughter of Prabhu Oraon, resident of
P.S.- Latehar, Village- Murup, P.Ο.- Latehar & District -
Latehar
434. Raushan Kumar Gupta, son of Naresh Prasad Gupta,
resident of Village- Banpur, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar, District -
Latehar
435. Aprajita Kumari, daughter of Dilmohan Ram, resident of
C/O Ghanshyam Turi, Village- Chiro, P.O.- Chandwa, P.S.-
Chandwa & District - Latehar.
436. Sumit Kumar Yadav, son of Lal.i Yadav, resident of Village
& P.O.- Richughuta, P.S.- Latehar & District - Latehar.
437. Sakshi Kumari, daughter of Rakesh Kumar, resident of
Thana Chowk, Gurudwara Road, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar Hsgii &
District - Latehar.
438. Lal Mohan Singh, son of Ramkhelawan Singh, resident of
Village - Chhipadohar, P.O. & P.S. - Latehar, District - Latehar.
439. Amit Kumar Gupta, son of Suresh Prasad Gupta, resident
of Near Girls School, Saroj Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Chandwa &
District - Latehar.
440. Ranjan Bhuiyan, son of Rajdev Bhuiyan, resident of
Village- Mile, P.O.- Matlong, P.S. - Manika & District- Latehar
441. Shinku Kumar, son of Vijay Prasad, resident of C/O - Vijay
23
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Prasad, Village- Purni Palheya, P.Ο.- Palheya, P.S. Manik, VTC-
Palheya & District - Latehar.
442. Nazis Ansari, son of Jamaluddin Ansari, resident of S/O
Jamaluddin Ansari, Village- Fudi, P.O. & P.S.- Khunti &
District - Khunti.
443. Manoj Kumar Singh, son of Chamru Singh, resident of S/O
- Chamru Singh, Village & P.O.- Demu, P.S.- Latehar & District
- Latehar.
444. Namdhari Ram, son of Latoo Ram, resident of S/O- Lattu
Ram, Village- Ganeshpur, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar & District -
Latehar.
445. Vishwanath Kumar Singh, son of Yamuna Singh, resident
of C/O - Yamuna Singh, Village - Newari, P.O.- Murup, P.S.-
Latehar & District - Latehar
446. Dinesh Yadav, son of Bishundev Yadav, resident of S/O-
Bishundev Yadav, Village & P.O.- Dundu, P.S.- Latehar &
District - Latehar.
447. Sachindra Oraon, son of Devshahay Oraon, resident of S/O
- Devshahay Oraon, Village- Arahara, P.O.- Herhanj, P.S.- Balu
& District - Latehar.
448. Sumitra Kumari, daughter of Anil Oraon, resident of D/O-
Anil Oraon, Village- Arahara, P.O.- Tasu Herhanj, P.S.- Balu &
District - Latehar.
449. Ghanshyam Turi, son of Shaniwar Turi, resident of S/O-
Shaniwar Turi, Village- Chiro, P.O. & P.S.- Chandwa, District -
Latehar.
450. Prashant Kumar Singh, son of Hari Deo Singh, resident of
S/O- Hari Deo Singh, Village- Mangra, P.O.- Murup, P.S.-
Latehar & District- Latehar.
451. Jay Shankar Oraon, son of Dukhan Oraon, resident of S/O-
Dukhan Oraon, Bandua, Palheya, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar &
District- Latehar.
452. Sohan Singh, son of Gaju Singh, resident of S/O- Sri Gaju
Singh, 23, Karmahi, Near Ranchi Road, Dundu, P.O. & P.S.-
Latehar, District- Latehar.
453. Seema Kumari, daughter of Mani Saw, resident of W/O-
Shankar Prasad, Village- Mail, P.O.- Matlong, P.S.- Manika &
District- Latehar.
454. Deepak Bando, son of Kisun Bando, resident of S/O- Kisun
Bando, Village- Sundil, P.O.- Kamre, P.S.- Ratu & District-
Ranchi.
455. Tribhuwan Murmu, son of Kashinath Murmu, resident of
6E, KOH, Near Samudayak Bhawan, P.O.- Munga Sarla, P.S.-
Petabar & District- Bokaro.
456. Niranjan Kachhap, son of Vimal Kachhap, resident of 80 A,
Village- Khijri, P.O. & P.S.- Namkum, District- Ranchi
457. Sunil Munda, son of Lutharu Munda, resident of Setathuru,
P.O.- Birda, P.S.- Karra & District- Khunti.
458. Roshan Tigga, son of Sushil Tigga, resident of Dibadih
Bhagat Kocha, Doranda, H.O., P.O., P.S. & District- Ranchi.
459. Raghavendo, son of JP Tiwari, resident of Jwala Prasad
24
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Tiwari, 15/1, New Saket Nagar, Hinoo, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda,
District- Ranchi.
460. Pramila Bediya, daughter of Bhimeshwar Bediya, resident
of Phulmani Devi, Harchanda, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi & District-
Ranchi
461. Manoj Kumar Bedia, son of Chandra Mohan Bedia, resident
of Near Temple, Village- Sursu Harjalum, P.O.- Tati, P.S.-
Angra & District- Ranchi.
462. Manoj Kujur, son of Bertus Kujur, resident of Koynar Toli,
P.S.- Jagannathpur, P.O.- Pundag & District- Ranchi
463. Laxmi Kant Mahto, son of Pawan Mahto, resident of House
No. - 19, Kishunpur, Parasi, P.O.- Tamar, P.S.- Ranchi &
District- Ranchi.
464. Hembrom Clement, son of Cyril Hembrom, resident of
Ilaki, P.O., P.S. & District- Sahibganj.
465. Bipul Kumar, son of Murari Prasad Singh, resident of
Village- Kargali Kala, Kubri, P.O., P.S. & District- Giridih.
466. Kapildeo Mahto, son of Shri Dukhan Mahato, resident of
Baradaha, Baliapur, P.O., P.S. & District- Dhanbad.
467. Shashi Gope, son of Mohan Gope, resident of Pandra,
Bero, P.O. & P.S.- Pandra & District- Ranchi.
468. Kumar Ajay Prasad, son of Rajendra Prasad, resident of
Village- Kadamdih, Thana- Sonahatu, P.O. & P.S.- Lowahatu &
District- Ranchi.
469. Manish Kumar Singh, son of Binay Kumar Singh, resident
of Q. No- 20/D, Booti Road, SSP House, Dindayal Nagar, P.O.-
Ranchi GPO, P.S.- Sadar & District- Ranchi.
470. Mukesh Kumar, son of Muneshwar Mahto, resident of P.O.
& P.S.- B Nawadih, Burudih & District- Ranchi.
471. Suresh Chandra Mahto, son of Maheshwar Mahto, resident
of Village- Jethadih, Amlesa, P.O. & P.S. & District- Ranchi.
472. Jitendra Oraon, son of Jagat Oraon, resident of Rukka,
P.O.- Irba, P.S.- Ormanjhi, District- Ranchi.
473. Barnabas Kachhap, son of Lawrence Kachhap, resident of
Near Airport, Hundru, Haratanr, P.O.- Hundru, P.S.- Doranda
& District- Ranchi.
474. Prakash Kumar Mahto, son of Madhusudan Mahto, resident
of Village- Ghaghra, Patrahatu, P.O. & P.S.- Patrahattu &
District- Ranchi.
475. Kapil Kumar Mahato, son of Nagendra Mahato, resident of
Ekra Basti Loyabad, Bansjora, P.O. & P.S.- Bansjora & District-
Dhanbad.
476. Naveen Kumar Das, son of Baburam Das, resident of
Village- Ghuti, P.S.- Ghaghra, P.O.- Ruki & District- Gumla
477. Robin Guria, son of Narsingh Guria, resident of Village-
Sagjori, P.O.- Jaraikela, P.S.- Manoharpur, Panchayat-
Makranda & District- West Singhbhum.
478. Dipu Kumar Mahto, son of Bhushanlal Mahto, resident of
Dudhkundi P.O, P.S. & District - West Singhbhum
479. Maheshwar Pradhan, son of Harish Chandra Pradhan,
resident of Village- Bhalupani, P.O. & P.S.- Bhalupani,
Karaikella & District - West Singhbhum.
25
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
480. Niranjan Kumar, son of Ramrati Prasad, resident of Haidar
Nagar, Simarshot, Kukahi, P.O., P.S. & District- Palamu.
481. Ashok Kumar Baskey, son of Sunil Kumar Baskey, resident
of P.O.- Gal Gal Tand, P.S.- Chandankiyari, Bansgari & District
- Bokaro.
482. Kundan Kumar Gupta, son of Prameshwari Prasad Gupta,
resident of Tarhasi, P.O. & P.S.- Tarhasi , District Palamu.
483. Binod Kumar Mahto, son of Saheb Mahto, resident of
Village, P.O. & P.S.- Balsagra, Belsagra Churchu, District -
Hazaribagh.
484. Abhishek Ranjan, son of Awadh .i Singh, resident of Seniar
Mohalla Jori & P.O. P.S. & District - Chatra.
485. Asharam Mahto, son of Baijnath Mahto, resident of 03,
Kenduwadih, P.S.- Silli, Near Power House, P.O.- Lota &
District - Ranchi.
486. Ajay Prajapati, son of Kisun Prajapati, resident of Village-
Hutar, P.O. & P.S.- Hethpochara & District- Latehar.
487. Sudhir Kumar, son of Rajendra Yadav, resident of Village -
Gulli, P.O.- Pitij, P.S.- Itkhori & District - Chatra.
488. Suresh Kumar, son of Biru Saw, resident of 41 B, Hariya,
Chandwa, Alaudia, P.O., P.S. & District - Latehar.
489. Chintu Kumar Saw, son of Chhotan Saw, resident of
Village, P.S. & P.O.- Sariya, District- Giridih.
490. Amit Verma, son of Degnarayan Pd Verma, resident of
Village & P.O.-Parwatpur, P.S. - Ahilyapur & District - Giridih
491. Arun Kumar, son of Naresh Raut, resident of Panchayat -
Jamdiha, Village - Parwatudih, P.O. & P.S.- Deori, District -
Giridih.
492. Shashi Mahto, son of Shiv Ratan Mahto, resident of
Hariom Tower, Nagra Toli, Circular Road, Lalpur & District-
Ranchi.
493. Vikram Singh, son of Suryadeo Singh, resident of Manika &
P.O., P.S. & District - Latehar.
494. Sushma Kumari, daughter of Bhagirath Mahato, resident
of Keduadih Basti, Bengabad , P.O., P.S. & District- Dhanbad.
495. Vijay Kumar, son of Narayan Gope, resident of Birajpur,
P.S. & P.O.- Bengabad, District - Giridih.
496. Chandan Kumar Ray, son of Shankar Ray, resident of
Village- Chorra, P.O.- Siyatand, P.S.- Jamua & District -
Giridih.
497. Aditya Anand, son of Umesh Nand Tiwari, resident of Shiv
Durga Mandir Lane, P.O. & P.S.- Ratu Road , District - Ranchi.
498. Vishal Kumar Gaurav, son of Uday Kumar Mishra, resident
of Chai Bagan, P.O. & P.S- Namkum , District - Ranchi.
499. Kumari Premlata, daughter of Kundan Prasad, resident of
Near Area Kandaakhaar, Hamidganj, Ward No.- 1, P.O. & P.S.-
Daltonganj , District - Palamu.
500. Gumeshwa Munda, son of Nirmal Munda, resident of Near
Durga Mandir, Village- Hombai, P.O.- Neori, Vikash, P.S.-
Sadar Mesra & District - Ranchi.
501. Jagat Narayan Thakur, son of Om Prakash Thakur,
resident of Hathi Khana Chowk, Kali Mandir Road, P.O. & P.S.-
26
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Ranchi, District - Ranchi.
502. Vivek Xalxo, son of Budhai Xalxo, resident of Village-
Gundu, P.O. Hulhundu, P.S. - Hatia & District- Ranchi.
503. Mohammad Akhtar Ansari, son of Md. Khairun Ansari,
resident of House No. A/293, Near Taslim Masjid, Gulmoher
First Street, Tiwari Tank Road, Hind Piri, G.P.O. & P.S.-
Ranchi, & District - Ranchi.
504. Md. Aftab Khan, son of Abid Khan, resident of Village &
P.O.- Chhencha, P.S. Latehar & District - Latehar.
505. Sajita Kumari, daughter of Sushil Kumar Singh, resident of
Village & P.O.- Adar, P.S.- Ghaghra & District - Gumla.
506. Oskar Horo, son of Sukra Horo, resident of Road No. 01,
Near Vikash Nagar, Kochatoli, Khijri, P.O. & P.S.- Namkum,
District - Ranchi.
507. Varum Kumar, son of Dashrath Ram, resident of Village-
Belangi, P.O.- Gutjora, P.S. - Khunti & District- Khunti.
508. Pankaj Kumar Nag, son of Ajay Hazam, resident of Village-
Hansa, P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District - Khunti.
509. Ajay Singh, son of Doman Singh, resident of Village- Torpa
Road Khunti Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District - Khunti.
510. Amit Mahto, son of Bharat Mahto, resident of Village &
P.O.- Ethe, P.S.- Murhu &District- Khunti.
511. Dinesh Mahto, son of Tulsi Mahto, resident of Village-
Ethe, P.O.+P.S.- Murhu & District - Khunti.
512. Ashok Ram, son of Mogal Ram, resident of P.O.- G
Jaltanda, P.S.- Murhu, Village - Jaltanda & District- Khunti.
513. Upendra Kumar, son of Keshari Saw, resident of Village-
Sima Haphua, P.O.- Haphuwa, P.S.- Chatra & District -
Chatra.
514. Manoranjan Kumar Choudhary, son of Shatrughan
Choudhary, resident of Kumar Toli, Near Kanya Pathshala,
Doranda, P.O. & P.S- Doranda, District - Ranchi.
515. Manu Kauriar, son of Mahru Kauriar, resident of Village-
Maheshpur, P.O. & P.S. - Angara, District- Ranchi.
516. Ajit Kumar, son of Manu Prasad Gupta, resident of Ward-
20, Village-Tandwa, P.O. & P.S. - Garhwa, District- Garhwa.
517. Md. Shamsad Alam, son of Md. Mazhar Alam, resident of
Village- Huppu, P.O.- Toyar, P.S. - Gola, Near Mosque, District
- Ramgarh.
518. Abid Aslam, son of Rashid Aslam, resident of Village-
Huppu, Near Raza Masjid, P.O. & P.S.- Gola, District -
Ramgarh
519. Suman Prabhat Kujur, son of Ramesh Oraon, resident of
Ward No.- 06, Village- Arru, P.O. & P.S. - Senha & District -
Lohardaga.
520. Pawan Prakash Kujur, son of Pancham Kumar Bhagat,
resident of Near ITI Ranchi, Pawa Toli, Hehal, P.O. & P.S.-
Hehal, District - Ranchi.
521. Pradeep Suman Tirkey, son of Sudhir Tirkey, resident of
village-Khariyapara, P.O. Gumla, P.S.-Gumla, District-Gumla
522. Akash Munda, son of Nandu Munda, resident of Village
27
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Janum, P.O. Angara, P.S. Angara, District-Ranchi.
523. Sunil Kumar, son of Shambhu Lal, resident of ward no. - 18,
Janakpur Muhalla, P.O. - Tandwa, P.S. - Garhwa, District -
Garhwa.
524. Gourab Kumar, son of Umesh Chandra Jha, resident of
village - Mohanpur, P.O. - Mohanpur, P.S. - Mohanpur,
District - Godda.
525. Rohit Kindo, son of Augustus Kindo, resident of Pallotti
Nagar Tati, P.O. + P.S. -Kuru, Village - Tati, District -
Lohardaga.
526. Vinod Toppo, son of Sukra Toppo, resident of village -
Rampur, P.O. - Rajaulatu, P.S. - Rajaulatu, District - Ranchi.
527. Anil Kumar Ghansi, son of Bhikhu Ghansi, resident of Village
Bundu, P.O. + P.S. Petarbar, District Bokaro.
528. Govind Kumar, son of Saryu Saw, resident of Near Lord Shiv
Mandir, Village + P.O. - Chainpur, P.S. - Mandu, District -
Ramgarh.
529. Dinesh Kumar, son of Adhar Chandra Aash, resident of Matri
Chhaya, Sharda Colony, Power House Road, Chutiya, Behind
Kali School, G.P.O. Ranchi, P.S.-Ranchi, District - Ranchi.
530. Rahul Kumar, son of Nunu Prasad Mehta, resident of village-
Bhusai, P.S. Ichak, District-Hazaribagh.
531. Manoranjan Kumar, son of Jogi Pahariya, resident of
Panchayat - Bara Dumria, Village - Ghurmundani, P.O.
Garapathar, P.S. Maslia, District - Dumka.
532. Mukesh Kumar, son of Ashok Kumar Saw, resident of Bank
Colony, Vikash Nagar, Piska More, Ratu Road, P.O. - Hehal,
P.S. - Hehal, District - Ranchi.
533. Rahul Kumar Choudhary, son of Lal Babu Choudhary, resident
of Lal Babu Niwas, No-18. New Shastry Nagar, Madhukam,
Gali No-01, P.O. Madhukam, P.S.-Sukhdev Nagar, District -
Ranchi.
534. Raj Kishor Mahto, son of Raidas Mahto, resident of village -
Sosodih, P.O. Baredih, P.S. - Tamar, District - Ranchi.
535. Yashpal Tirkey, son of Christopher Tirkey, resident of Village -
Rengari, P.O. - Srinagar, P.S. - Jari, District - Gumla.
536. Dilip Tigga, son of Mathias Tigga, resident of Village -
Gariyajor, P.O. - Kurdeg, P.S. - Kurdeg, District - Simdega.
537. Pintu Kumar Saw, son of Kesho Saw, resident of Village
Asdhiya, P.O. Kamat, P.S. - Chatra, District Chatra.
538. Shubham Kumar Mahto, son of Khaita Mahto, resident of
Village & P.O-Honhemodha, P.S. Mandu, District -
Hazaribagh.
539. Vikas Kumar, son of Anil Kumar, resident of Muri Hill Bairagi,
Ward No - 11, P.O. - Gaya, P.S. Gaya, District - Gaya.
540. Mohit Kumar, son of Jaikant Mandal, resident of Ward No-
14, Gali No-03, Maharshi Nagar, Menhi Nagar, P.O. - Godda,
P.S. - Godda, District - Godda.
541. Mukesh Kumar, son of Titu Prasad Manjhi, resident of
Makan No 43, Ward No-01, Near Kali Temple, Village -
Hilaway, P.O. - Hilaway, P.S. - Pathargama, District - Godda.
542. Anup Kumar, son of Shankar Mandal, resident of Ward No -
28
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
2, Anand Marg School, Sarouni Bazar, P.O. - Sarouni Bazar,
P.S. - Sarauni, District - Godda.
543. Mohan Pandit, son of Lilananad Pandit, resident of Village
Malhara, P.O. Sarouni Bazar, P.S. Sarauni, District - Godda.
544. Ranjan Kumar, son of Rabindra Mandal, resident of Village
Ampara, P.O. + P.S. Amrapahari, District - Dumka.
545. Abhishek Bara, son of Charwa Oraon, resident of Peace Road
by Lane, Village - Lalpur, P.O. + P.S. - Lalpur, District -
Ranchi.
546. Suraj Kumar Thakur, son of Om Prakash Thakur, resident of
Village - Singhdaha, P.O. - Singhdaha, P.S.-Dhanbad, District
- Dhanbad.
547. Sintu Kumar Mandal, son of Jitu Mandal, resident of Village
Kankomath, P.O. Kanko, P.S. - Katras, District - Dhanbad.
548. Lowrence Toppo, son of Gyan Prakash Toppo, resident of
Village Masiatu, P.O. Masiatu, P.S. Latehar, District - Latehar.
549. Bipin Kumar Sahu, son of Radha Kishun Sahu, resident of
Village - Murgu, P.O. - Murgu, P.S. - Sisai, District Gumla.
550. Ajita Toppo, daughter of Fagu Toppo, resident of Village -
Karamtoli, P.O. + P.S. Gumla, District -Gumla.
551. Shweta Nayak, daughter of Anil Nayak, resident of Village -
Shivnagar, Khuntitoli, P.O. - Khuntitoli, P.S.-Simdega, District -
Simdega.
552. Jitendra Kumar, son of Birjnandan Prasad, resident of Near
Shiv Mandir, Aamtand, Ratu, P.O. Ratu, P.S. Ratu, District -
Ranchi.
553. Suman Kumar, son of Gorakh Nath Pandey, resident of House
No. 86, Godarma Kalan, Nagar Parishad Bishrampur, P.O.
Rehala, P.S. Bishrampur, District - Palamu.
554. Vikash Kumar, son of Fulchand Ganjhu, resident of Near
Pahari Mandir, Kumhar Toli, Ratu Road, P.Ο. -Ratu, P.S. -
Ratu, District - Ranchi.
555. Nitesh Kumar Tiwary, son of Pancham Tiwary, resident of
Village + P.O. - Harinamad, P.S. - Chainpur, District - Palamu.
556. Gautam Kumar, son of Kanhai Yadav, resident of Aan An, P.O.
- Lathehar, P.S. Lathehar, District -Latehar.
557. Nitesh Kumar Sahu, son of Naresh Sahu, resident of Village -
Karam Toli, P.O. - Telgaon, P.S. - Gumla, District Gumla.
558. Ashish Anand Tirkey, son of Ajit Tirkey, resident of House No.
212, Ward No. 2, Thakur Toli, P.O.- Simdega, P.S. - Simdega,
District - Simdega.
559. Sanjay Ohadar, son of Gaja Ohadar, resident of Village Umra,
Thekratoli, Baghma, P.O.-Baghma, P.S. - Baghmara, District -
Gumla.
560. Sanjay Kumar Minj, son of Jamedar Minj, resident of House
No. 2, Forest Colony, Near Forest Office, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S.
Chaibasa, District Pashchimi Singhbhum.
561. Noora Mamta Minj, daughter of Francis Minj, resident of C/O
Nalin Ratnakar Toppo, 20240/B1/13, Behind AG Church
School, Xavier Nagar, Dela Toli, Kokar, Bariatu, P.O. Bariatu,
P.S. Bariatu, District - Ranchi.
562. Manoj Kumar, son of Sahdev Sahu, resident of Patia (Bazar
29
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Tanr), P.O. Patia, P.S. Gumla, District Gumla.
563. Rahul Ranjan, son of Chandra Shekhar Singh, resident of
Sukurhulu, P.O. - Sinjo, P.S. - Kuru, District - Lohardaga.
564. Pradeep Kumar Oraon, son of Etwa Oraon, resident of Village
- Bhaldam Chatti, P.O. - Asni, P.S. -Gumla, District - Gumla.
565. Tulsi Sahu, son of Najendra Sahu, resident of Village - Kasira,
P.O. - Patia, P.S. - Gumla, District - Gumla.
566. Kush Kumar, son of Hira Lal Shau, resident of Near Tarri
School, P.O. Karondi, P.S. - Gumla, District-Gumla.
567. Shashi Bhushan Oraon, son of Soma Oraon, resident of
Village - Soso More Kadamtoli, P.O. + P.S. - Gumla, District -
Gumla.
568. Sakil Siddiquiee, son of Taswar Siddiquiee, resident of Village
- Duriya, Datia, P.O. - Datia, P.S. -Gumla, District - Gumla.
569. Subhash Dhanwar, on of Jai Chand Dhanwar, resident of
Village - Koyanjali Nawatoli, P.O. - Karanj, P.S. Bharno,
District - Gumla.
570. Prabhu Prakash Oraon, son of Manga Oraon, resident of
Bishunpur, Banari, P.O. Banari, P.S. -Bishunpur, District -
Gumla.
571. Vivek Raj Sahu, son of Shiv Shankar Sahu, resident of Village
- Kasira, P.O. - Patia, P.S. - Gumla, District Gumla.
572. Vikash Prasad, son of Ras .i Prasad, resident of Village - Toto,
P.O. - Toto, P.S. - Gumla, District -Gumla.
573. Subhash Kumar Kamla, son of Vijay Kumar Kamla, resident of
Village - Bargaon, P.O. - Bargaon, P.S. -Sisai, District - Gumla.
574. Shankar Paswan, son of Sagar Paswan, resident of Village
Bhargaon, P.O. Jura, P.S. Gumla, District-Gumla.
575. Paduman Singh, son of Budram Singh, resident of Village -
Konbir, P.O & P.S. - Basia, District - Gumla.
576. Vishal Kumar, son of Binay Kumar Deo, resident of Village -
Kushmaha, P.O. - Deopur, P.S. - Jasidih, District - Deoghar.
577. Murari Kumar, son of Arun Mandal, resident of Village-
Jasobandh, P.O.-Mandankata, P.S.-Jasidih, District - Deoghar.
578. Sudhir Kumar Mahto, son of Nakul Mahto, resident of Village
- Sarla Khurd, P.O. - Sagrampur, P.S.-Ramgarh, District -
Ramgarh.
579. Mithlesh Kumar Mahto, son of Maniram Mahto, resident of
Near Tata Motors, Shastri Nagar, P.O. -Dhanbad, P.S. -
Bankmore, District - Dhanbad.
580. Upendra Kumar, son of Nageshwar Prajapati, resident of
Govindpur, Near Hanuman Mandir, P.O. Mandu, P.S. Mandu,
District - Ramgarh.
581. Sumit Kumar, son of Rajesh Kumar Rawani, resident of
Village - Dubra, P.O. - Ramchandrapur, P.S. - Deoghar, District
- Deoghar.
582. Shubham Kumar, son of Jai Prakash Yadav, resident of Radha
Nagar, Pandra, P.O. Hehal, P.S. -Sukhdev Nagar, District -
Ranchi.
583. Soni Linda, daughter of Gahanu Oraon, resident of Near Rock
Garden, Misir Gonad, Bakain Kocha, Kanke Road, P.O. -
Kanke, P.S. - Kanke, District - Ranchi.
30
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
584. Ravi Kumar, son of Laxmi Mahto, resident of Village - Gajni,
P.O. - Gajni, P.S. - Kairo, District -Lohardaga.
585. Arbind Sahu, son of Brajesh Sahu, resident of Village - Tetar
Bira, P.O. Karanj, P.S. - Bharno, District - Gumla.
586. Bitu Kumar, son of Nandu Sahu, resident of Village -
Khargdiha, P.O. - Khargdiha, P.S. - Jamua, District - Giridih.
587. Pravin Kumar Yadav, son of Premchand Yadav, resident of
House No. 111, Village Gumgi, P.O. -Gumgi, P.S. Tisari,
District - Giridih.
588. Sikandar Kumar Yadav, son of Suresh Prasad Yadav, resident
of Village-Katariyatand, P.O.-Dhuraita, P.S. - Hirodih, District -
Giridih.
589. Ashish Yadav, son of Lalu Yadav, resident of Village -
Manikbad, P.O. - Manikbad, P.S. - Deori, District Giridih.
590. Kamlesh Kumar, son of Mukhlal Mahto, resident of Village -
Kenduwatand, Near Panchayat Bhawan, At-Mael, P.O. -
Rajrappa, P.S. - Rajrappa, District - Ramgarh.
591. Sanjeet Kumar, son of Raju Yadav, resident of House No.
138, Village - Gumgi, P.O.-Gumgi, P.S. - Tisari, District -
Giridih.
592. Biswajeet Kumar Paswan, son of Deo Narayan Paswan,
resident of Village Karua Khurd, P.O. Rankabaulliya, P.S. -
Garhwa, District - Garhwa.
593. Rajesh Kumar Mehta, son of Prabhu Prasad Mehta, resident
of Village Adhaura, P.O. Banka, P.S. -Meral, District - Garhwa.
594. Sajjan Kumar Yadav, son of Sukhdew Yadav, resident of
Village - Gumgi, P.O. - Gumgi, P.S.-Tisari, District Giridih.
595. Kumari Geetanjaly Mehra, daughter of Kumar Basant Prasad,
resident of Village Bardahi, P.O. Patharadda, P.S. -
Patharadda, District - Deoghar.
596. Sachin Shukla, son of Ashok Shukla, resident of Village -
Sankha, P.O. - Ketat, P.S. - Rehla, District - Palamu.
597. Harshvardhan Bux Rai, son of Bishwajeet Bux Rai, resident of
Near Sarweshwari Ashram, Block Road, Nawadih Kalan, P.O.
Bishrampur, P.S. - Bishrampur, District - Palamu.
598. Md Tanweer Alam, son of Md Maswood Alam, resident of
House No. 12, Ward No. 04, Ρ.Ο. Madhupur, P.S. - Madhupur,
District - Deoghar.
599. Neeraj Kumar, son of Kuldeep Ram, resident of P.O. + P.S.
Ichak, Village Hadari, District Hazaribagh.
600. Divyanath Ram, Son of Loknath Ram, resident of Village-
Kundagada, P.O. - Champijaria, P.S.-Barkichanpi, District-
Lohardaga.
601. Bijendra Kumar, son of Upendra Singh, resident of Prince
Chouk, Village Saldega, P.O. + P.S. Simdega, District -
Simdega.
602. Perlok Kumar, son of Kapil Prasad, resident of Husainabad,
Ward No. 5, P.O.+P.S.-Husainabad, Ariari, District-
Sheikhpura.
603. Mukesh Kumar, son of Bashudeo Das, resident of House No.
32, Ward No. 12, Bherwa Nawadih, P.O. - Madhupur, P.S. -
Madhupur, District - Deoghar.
31
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
604. Sukumar Pramanik, son of Kamlakant Pramanik, resident of
Tangar Toli, P.O. + P.S. - Bundu, District Ranchi.
605. Shashank Shekhar, son of Kameshwar Prasad, resident of
Street - Indra Nagar, Road No. - 01, Bangali Tola, Landmark -
Near Munna Lodge, Village - Phulwari, P.O. - Phulwari, P.S. -
Phulwari, District - Patna.
606. Vandana Sahu, daughter of Braj Kishor Sahu, resident of
B.I.D. Basar Toli, P.O. - Lohardaga, P.S. -Lohardaga, District -
Lohardaga.
607. Dheeraj Kumar Paswan, son of Sahdeo Paswan, resident of
Choti Masjid, Laheri Tola, M-56, P.O. Chitarpur, P.S. -
Chitarpur, District - Ramgarh.
608. Anita Kumari Minz, daughter of Mohan Minz, resident of
Dugra Mandir Street, Kokar, Chuna Bhatta, V.T.C. Kokar, P.O. -
Kokar, P.S. Kokar, District - Ranchi.
609. Navneet Kumar, son of Awadhesh Mehta, resident of Village
Kharagpur, Dhab Kalan, P.O. Kharagpur, P.S. - Kharagpur,
District - Palamu.
610. Amod Kumar, son of Kramdeo Yadav, resident of Village
Tetariya, P.O. Kurhat, P.S. Hariharganj, District - Palamu.
611. Jeetendra Kumar, son of Shavind Singh, resident of Lohra,
Dumri, P.O. - Dumari, P.S. - Dumari, District - Lakhisarai.
612. Himanshu Toppo, son of Theodor Toppo, resident of Kadru
Pul Toli, North, P.O. - Doranda, P.S. -Argora, Near New Over
Bridge, District - Ranchi.
613. Md Meraj, son of Md Seraj, resident of 4 No., Lalpaniya Road,
Kamdhenu Petrol Pump, Bhadwa Banker, P.O. - Ramgarh, P.S.
- Ramgarh, District - Ramgarh.
614. Vivek Kumar Sinha, son of Vijay Kumar Sinha, resident of
Road No. 8, Ketari Bagan, P.O. - Namkum, P.S.-Namkum,
District - Ranchi.
615. Padmini, daughter of Arbind Kumar, resident of 69, Santosh
Bhawan, State Bank Road, Makatpur, P.O. - Giridih, P.S. -
Giridih, District - Giridih.
616. Deepesh Rajwar, son of Harikishun Rajwar, resident of Agar
Toli, Bakshidih, P.O. - Bakshidih, P.S. - Ranchi, District -
Ranchi.
617. Hiralal Yadav, son of Fulchand Yadav, resident of GMT 37,
Govindpur C, Bokaro Thermal, P.Ο. - Gobindpur, P.S. -
Gobindpur, District - Bokaro.
618. Suraj Sahu, son of Brijmohan Sahu, resident of Village
Masmano, P.O. Bhandra, P.S.-Lohardaga, Sahu Toli, Masmano
Thakurgaon, District-Lohardaga.
619. Rahul Kumar, son of Hiralal Mahto, resident of 77 C, Chargi,
P.O. - Chargi, P.S. - Chargi, District - Bokaro.
620. Vijay Kumar Singh, son of Mukti Nath Singh, resident of
Gayanti Niwas, Gitil Kocha, P.O.-Kokar, P.S.-Kokar, District -
Ranchi.
621. Chandra Shekhar Kashyap, son of Manoj Kashyap, resident of
Village Jobhiya, P.O.-Banda, P.S.-Gola, District - Ramgarh.
622. Saroj Kumari, daughter of Soma Oraon, resident of P.O. -
Gurugain, P.S. Burmu, Patratoli, District -Ranchi.
32
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
623. Romit Bhaskar, son of Mahesh Prasad, resident of Panchayat
- Makdiha, Block - Dhanwar, Village Chandranagar, P.O.-Kubri,
P.S.-Dhanwar & District-Giridih.
624. Manohar Kumar Sharma, son of Rohini Sharma, resident of
P.O.-Chandra, P.S-Chandankiyari, Udalbani, District-Bokaro.
625. Rahul Ranjan, son of Mahabir Mahto, resident of Village
Tantri South, P.O. Tupkadih, P.S. Jaridih, District - Bokaro.
626. Md. Amir Suhail, son of Md. Taslim Ahmad, resident of
Kokdoro, P.O. Kokdoro, P.S. - Kokdoro, District - Ranchi.
627. Ajhar Alam, son of Abdul Wahab, resident of P.O. Kokdoro,
P.S. Kokdoro, District - Ranchi.
628. Chandan Kumar Yadav, son of Bhikhan Mahto, resident of
Panchayat - Jaridih, Village + P.O. - Janta, P.S.Birni, District -
Giridih.
629. Amarjeet Malakar, son of Anil Malakar, resident of Dari, P.O.
Simariya, P.S. Simariya, District -Chatra.
630. Purushottam Singh, son of Surendra Singh, resident of
Village - Majhigawan, P.O. Tarhasi, P.S. -Tarhasi, District -
Palamu.
631. Ajit Kumar Karmali, son of Shakun Karmali, resident of
1A/156, Subhash Nagar, P.O. - Amlo, P.S. -Bermo, District -
Bokaro.
632. Rajesh Mahto, son of Makhan Lal Mahto, resident of Village +
P.O. - Balsagra, P.S. - Balsogra, District - Hazaribagh.
633. Rahul Kumar, son of Shrikishun Sahu, resident of Murgu, P.O.
- Sisai, P.S. - Sisai, District - Gumla.
634. Dileep Kumar Mahto, son of Saheb Mahto, resident of Near
High School, P.O. - Balsagra, P.S. Churchu, District -
Hazaribagh.
635. Ajay Oraon, son of Ayata Oraon, resident of Village
Garhagaon, P.O. Garhagaon, P.S. Garhagaon, District -
Ranchi.
636. Rahul Kumar, son of Deelip Kumar, resident of 114, Amnari,
Silwar Khurd, P.O. Silwar Khurd, P.S.Silwar Khurd, District -
Hazaribagh.
637. Vivek Kumar Yadav, son of Ishwary Prasad Yadav, resident of
Matnag, P.O. Panki, P.S. Panki, District - Palamu.
638. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, son of Bramhdeo Singh, resident of
Village Sildiliya Kalan, P.O. Sildiliya Kalan, P.S.Tarhasi, District
- Palamu.
639. Ajay Kumar Singh, son of Bhagee Singh, resident of Tola
Bankheta, Village - Panki, P.O. + P.S. - Panki, District Palamu.
640. Manoj Kumar, son of Punat Mochi, resident of Village -
Basdiha, P.O. - Dandarkala, P.S. - Panki, District Palamu.
641. Prasoon Kumar, son of Birendra Kumar Pandey, resident of
C/O - Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, Near Marwari College, Village +
P.O. + P.S. Panki, District - Palamu.
642. Juhi Kumari, daughter of Dhirendra Pandey, resident of
Village Bachdohar, P.O. - Tetarai, P.S. -Panki, District -
Palamu.
643. Arun Kumar Choudhary, son of Satyanarayan Choudhary,
resident of Village Jarka, P.O. Kadhwan, P.S. Bishrampur,
33
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
District - Palamu.
644. Gaurav Kumar, son of Sanjeev Pandey, resident of near Vivek
for Vikash, Village + P.O. Sudna, P.S. Medininagar, District-
Palamu.
645. Deepak Kumar, son of Lal .i Singh, resident of Village -
Sundipur, P.O. - Sundipur, P.S. - Kandi, District Garhwa.
646. Praful Kumar Singh, son of Satyendra Singh, resident of
Village - Jaidu, P.O. - Udayapura, P.S. Tarhasi, District -
Palamu.
647. Manish Kumar, son of Sachchida Ram, resident of Kariahar,
P.O. Gahar Pathara, P.S. Gahar Pathara, District - Palamu.
648. Sushil Kumar, son of Nandkishor Ram, resident of Village
Jaymarn, P.O. Patan, P.S. Patan, District - Palamu.
649. Bimlesh Kumar, son of Ganesh Ram, resident of Village
Kaudiya, P.O. Gharatiya, P.S. Bishrampur, District - Palamu.
650. Rajan Kumar, son of Ram Deo Ram, resident of Gram Amba,
P.O. Hariharganj, P.S.-Hariharganj, District-Palamu.
651. Sanju Kumari, daughter of Sakaldeep Prajapati, resident of
Village - Chatti Sinduria, P.O. - Jhabar, P.S. Sinduria, District -
Palamu.
652. Vikash Kumar Yadav, son of Mandev Yadav, resident of
Village Kasiyar, P.O. - Ratnag, P.S. Hussainabad, District
Palamu.
653. Abhishek Kumar Paswan, son of Rishi Manjhi, resident of
161, Ward No 8, Village Pokharaha Khurd, P.O. - Rajwadih,
P.S. - Medininagar, District - Palamu.
654. Aakash Kumar, son of Adar Manjhi, resident of Village & P.O-
Pokhraha Khurd, P.S. Medininagar, District - Palamu.
655. Animesh Kumar Mishra, son of Sachchidanand Mishra,
resident of Village Lohra, P.O. Garikh Garikhas, P.S. -
Pandwa, District-Palamu.
656. Harish Chandra Chaudhary, son of Deelip Chaudhary,
resident of Village, P.O. & P.S.- Chainpur, District-Palamu.
657. Mukesh Kumar Ram, Son of Suresh Ram, resident of Near
Shiv Mandir, Badal Chowk, Barka Kalan, Ratanpur, P.O., P.S. &
District - Hazaribagh.
658. Anita Kumari, daughter of Ram Prasad Singh, resident of
Village - Banjari, P.O. + P.S. Bhanidaria, District Garhwa.
659. Pradeep Prasad, son of Mahavir Sao, resident of Tola
Bhandar, Village - Kelhar, P.O. - Patan, P.S. -Patan, District -
Palamu.
660. Shekhar Sudhanshu Pandit, son of Pachchu Pandit, resident
of Village Khajuri, P.O. Kanjia, P.S. Bhandaria, District -
Garhwa.
661. Kartik Kumar, son of Ambika Ram, resident of Village
Gamhariya, P.O. Japla, P.S. Hussainabad, District - Palamu.
662. Santosh Ram, son of Harihar Ram, resident of Village + P.O.
Raji, P.S. Kharaundhi, District -Garhwa.
663. Samiksha Gupta, daughter of Prabhu Dayal Gupta, resident
of Near Old Gurudwara, P.O. & P.S.-Daltonganj, District -
Palamu.
664. Bablu Kumar, son of Deenanath Singh, resident of Village -
34
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Patariya Khurd, P.S. & P.O. - Chainpur, District - Palamu.
665. Rakesh Kumar Yadav, son of Kedar Yadav, resident of Village
Simarsot, P.O. Kukhi, P.S. Haidernagar, District - Palamu.
666. Niraj Kumar Bhagat, son of Ajay Kumar Bhagat, resident of
Village - Hariyari, P.S. & P.O. - Poraiyahat, District - Godda.
667. Gourav Kumar, son of Congress Prasad Yadav, resident of
Village - Pagwara, Paschim Patti, P.O. & P.S. - Hansdiha,
District - Dumka.
668. Sona Lal Pandit, son of Rajendra Pandit, resident of Jay
Nagar Piper Joriya, Nonbatta, P.O., P.S. & District - Godda.
669. Abdullah Ansari, son of Md Safir Ansari, resident of P.S. &
P.O. - Sariayahat, Nawadih, District - Dumka.
670. Tripurari Yadav, son of Ghanshyam Yadav, resident of 46, 04
Pakariya Ghat, P.O., P.S. & District - Godda.
671. Devjeet Das, son of Subhasis Das, resident of Shivpahar
Road, Sonwadangal, P.O., P.S. & District - Dumka.
672. Kundan Kumar Chourasia, son of Kangres Prasad Chourasia,
resident of Village Petsar, P.O. Petsar, P.S.-Jarmundi, District -
Dumka
673. Sambhu Rajak, son of Suresh Rajak, resident of P.O. Shiv
Pahad, P.S. Dumka Town, Sonwadangal, District - Dumka.
674. Nitu Kumari, daughter of Santosh Kumar Mandal, resident of
P.O. - Jamjori, P.S. - Hansdiha, Village -Jamjori, Birnia,
District - Dumka.
675. Vikash Kumar Pandit, son of Hiralal Pandit, resident of
Sonajori, Kumhar Tola, P.O.,& P.S.-Bhognadih, District
Sahebganj.
676. Ashish Kumar Mandal, son of Rabindra Kumar Mandal,
resident of P.O. & P.S. Jarmundi, Village - Bargo, District -
Dumka.
677. Shreemant Kumar, son of Mukti Pada Mandal, resident of
Village & P.O.-Chhot Asna, P.S. Fatehpur, District-Jamtara.
678. Mahesh Kumar, son of Kamal Kishor Mandal, resident of
Purana Dumka, Kewat Para, Sonwadangal, P.O., P.S. &
District - Dumka.
679. Md Samiruddin Ansari, son of Md Samiruddin Ansari, resident
of P.O. - Astajora, P.S. - Kathikhund, P.O. & P.S. - Madhuban,
District - Dumka.
680. Amit Kumar Choudhary, son of Sambhu Choudhary, resident
of Mirjachauki, Mahadevwarn,P.O. & P.S. -Mandro, District -
Sahebganj.
681. Md Mudassir Ansari, son of Md Maqbul Ansari, resident of
Village Sidpahari, P.O. Chhalapathar, P.S.Masalia, District -
Dumka.
682. Md Shahzahan Ansari, son of Md Kurban Ansari, resident of
Village - Sidpahari, P.O. - Chhalapathar, P.S. Masalia, District -
Dumka.
683. Musarraf Hussian, son of Md Taleb Ansari, resident of P.O. -
Chhaila Pathar, P.S. - Jama, District -Dumka.
684. Manoj Hembrom, son of Kistu Hembrom, resident of P.O. -
Machakhicha, P.S. - Dumka Muffasil, Village Bhikha, District -
Dumka.
35
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
685. Bholanath Saha, son of Harendra Saha, resident of
Dhobadanga, P.O., P.S. & District - Pakur.
686. Bheem Besra, son of Patwari Besra, resident of Village Tand,
District - Godda. Salga Tanar, P.O. Padampur, P.S.-Salga Tand,
District-Godda.
687. Vikas Kumar, son of Bijay Prasad Sah, resident of P.O. Bando
Haripur, P.S. Muffasil, Village Dharbhnga, District - Dumka.
688. Premnandan Kumar Sah, son of Jai Narayan Sah, resident of
Sarkanda, P.O., P.S. & District -Godda.
689. Ghanshyam Kumar, son of Lagan Prasad Sah, resident of
Chinadhab, P.O., P.S. & District -Godda.
690. Sentu Kumar Mandal, son of Gholtan Mandal, resident of
village-Ghatpahar Pur, P.S. & P.O-Mohanpur, District-Godda.
691. Santosh Kumar Pandit, son of Bhubneshwar Pandit, resident
of Village - Gangta Khurd, Karpuri Nagar B, Sarkanda, Ward
No. 21, P.O. & P.S.-Godda, District -Godda.
692. Subhash Kumar, son of Khirodhar Mahto, resident of Beech
Tola, Village - Champi, P.O., P.S. & District - Bokaro.
693. Kamlesh Kumar, son of Kailash Thakur, resident of Village
Fulwar, P.O. & P.S.- Poraiyahat, District Godda.
694. Hemant Kumar Thakur, son of Lakhan Lal Thakur, resident of
Village Sakri Phulwar, P.O. & P.S.-Poraiyahat, District-Godda.
695. Rakesh Kumar, son of Santosh Ram Das, resident of Village,
P.O. & P.S.-Poraiyahat, District - Godda.
696. Shyam Kumar Tudu, son of Nasib Tudu, resident of Village -
Daharlangi, P.O. & P.S.- Paraspani, District -Godda.
697. Birendra Murmu, son of Marang Murmu, resident of Village
Godda. Matihani, P.Ο. & P.S.-Tardiha, District-Godda.
698. Mahesh Kisku, son of Upendra Kisku, resident of Village, P.O.
& P.S. Paraspani, District - Godda.
699. Prashant Kumar Pandey, son of Daninath Pandey, resident of
Kuldeep Singh Road, P.O., P.S. & District - Godda.
700. Amrit Pratyay, son of Satyendra Kumar Sinha, resident of P.O.
+ P.S. Dumka, Dudhani, District Dumka.
701. Manish Thakur, son of Pramod Thakur, resident of Village
Bada Bandh, Rasikpur, Sonwadangal, P.O.Dumka, P.S.
Dumka, District - Dumka.
702. Kapildeo Das, son of Khudu Rabidas, resident of Village
Manikbad, P.O. + P.S. Manikabad, District - Giridih.
703. Namit Kumar Das, son of Sadanand Ravidaa, resident of
Ambedkar Yuva Club, Manikabad, P.O. + P.S.Manikabad,
District - Giridih.
704. Sitaram Pandey, son of Balgovind Pandey, resident of Village
- Dhibiyadih, P.O. - Khesmi, P.S. -Markachcho, District -
Koderma, Pin - 825418.
705. Umashankar Verma, son of Ramneshwar Prasad Verma,
resident of Village - Malidih, P.O. - Siyatand, P.S.-Jamua,
District - Giridih.
706. Khushbu Kumari, daughter of Jodho Ram, resident of Village
- Pokhariya, Panchayat - Pokhariya, P.O. - Beko, P.S. Bagodar,
District - Giridih.
707. Md Aalam Ansari, son of Md Sarfuddin Ansari, resident of
36
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Village - Patardih Chiromahua, Panchayat - Remba, Block -
Jamua, P.O. Remba, P.S. Hirodoh, District - Giridih.
708. Chandan Kumar Sinha, son of Bhagwati Charan Prasad,
resident of Village-Sarpata, P.O. Sarath, P.S.-Sarwan, District
- Deoghar.
709. Pankaj Kumar, son of Binod Yadav, resident of Village-Bairia,
P.O.-Bairia, P.S. - Dewri, District-Giridih.
710. Manish Rao, son of Badri Das, resident of Rajendra Nagar,
P.S. & P.O.- Giridih, District - Giridih.
711. Chiranjivi Prasad Saw, son of Ramlal Saw, resident of Village
- Pratappur, P.O. - Ranikhawa, P.S. Giridih, District - Giridih.
712. Santosh Kumar Sahu, son of Arjun Saw, resident of Village -
Manikbad, P.O. - Manikbad, P.S. - Deori, District - Giridih.
713. Prakash Kumar Gupta, son of Shankar Saw, resident of
Village - Manikbad, P.O. - Manikbad, P.S. - Deori, District -
Giridih.
714. Pintu Prasad Verma, son of Mangar Mahto, resident of Ward
No. 4, P.O. Markacho, P.S. Markacho, Village - Nawadih,
District - Koderma.
715. Vipul Kumar Vikal, son of Yogendra Kumar, resident of Village
Gardih, P.O. - Jantajaridih, P.S. -Birni, District - Giridih.
716. Md Nishat Alam, son of Noushad Alam, resident of Village -
Khorimahua, Panchayat - Garjasaran, Block - Dhanwar, P.O. -
Khorimahua, P.S. - Dhanwar, District - Giridih.
717. Pankaj Kumar Verma, son of Umesh Prasad Verma, resident
of Village - Karihari, P.O. - Karihari, P.S.-Hirodih, District -
Giridih.
718. Dilip Kumar Saw, son of Ramji Saw, resident of Village -
Karihari, Block - Jamua, P.O. - Karihari, P.S.Hirodih, District -
Giridih.
719. Bhadaur Malakar, son of Rampti Mali, resident of Village -
Jaridih, Panchayat - Jaridih, Block - Birni, P.O. - Janata
Jaridih, P.S. Birni, District - Giridih.
720. Md Zabed Ansari, son of Md Abdul Ansari, resident of House
No. 12, Chahal, Near Middle School, P.O. & P.S.-Chatro,
District - Giridih.
721. Pawan Kumar Ray, son of Kamdeo Ray, resident of Village -
Khoto, P.O. Chatro, P.S. - Bhelwaghato, District - Giridih.
722. Kamdev Sha, son of Binod Sah, resident of Village
Kosogondodighi, P.O. Chatro, P.S. Deori, District - Giridih.
723. Sanjay Sahu, son of .i Sahu, resident of Village
Kosogondodighi, P.O. + P.S. Chatro, District Giridih.
724. Shivanand Yadav, son of Prakash Yadav, resident of Village -
Mahuwatand, P.O. - Abjto, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.
725. Raghunandan Yadav, son of Prakash Prasad Yadav, resident
of Village - Mahuwatand, P.O.-Abjto, P.S.-Giridih, District-
Giridih.
726. Pappu Kumar Yadav, son of Ram Lakhan Yadav, resident of
Village - Kajmunda, P.O. Chikanadih, P.S.-Deori, District -
Giridih.
727. Anil Kumar Yadav, son of Gopi Kishan Yadav, resident of
Village-Godeyatamaran, P.O.-Murna, P.S.-Dhanwar, District -
37
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Giridih.
728. Sneh Prakash, Son of Lakshman Prasad Gupta, resident of
House No. 147, Police Line, P.O. - Giridih, P.S. - Giridih,
District - Giridih.
729. Rohit Kumar Pathak, son of Tulsi Prasad Pathak, resident of
Village - Gardih, P.O.-Ghoranjee, P.S.-Deori, District - Giridih.
730. Ajay Kumar, son of Krishna Mandal, resident of Village -
Nagar Keshwari, P.O. Keshwari, P.S. -Sariya, District - Giridih.
731. Mandeep Kumar, son of Baghmber Mohan Sinha, resident of
Near Raja Bangla, P.O. - Giridih, Buxidih Road, P.S.-Giridih,
District - Giridih.
732. Ishwar Das, son of Mani Das, resident of Village - Khandiha,
P.O. - S.P. Colyari, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.
733. Manish Kumar Rawani, son of Dhapru Rawani, resident of
Village - Chakradaha, P.O. - Chapuwadih, P.S.-Bengabad,
District - Giridih.
734. Kunal Kumar Gupta, son of Pratap Prasad Gupta, resident of
Laxmi Mohalla, Bada Chowk, P.S. & P.O.-Giridih, District -
Giridih.
735. Basudeo Das, son of Harilal Das, resident of Village -
Bagjobra, P.O. - Baniyadih, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.
736. Purushotam Kumar Ray, son of Mahesh Ray, resident of
Hasingraydih, P.O.-Budhiyadih, P.S. -Giridih, District - Giridih.
737. Rajesh Kumar, son of Nakul Choudhary, resident of House
No. 15, Charghara, Near P.N. Bank, P.Ο. -Charghara, P.S. -
Jamua, District - Giridih.
738. Birendra Kumar Das, son of Bheru Ravidas, resident of
Lebour Office, P.O. - Giridih, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.
739. Nandita Pandey, daughter of Sanjay Kumar Pandey, resident
of Dasdih, P.O. Gandey, P.S. -Gandey, District - Giridih.
740. Sikendra Kumar Verma, son of Ritlal Prasad Verma, resident
of House No. 11, Panchayat - Haria, Village - Ramusharan,
P.O. - Mandro, P.S. - Deori, District Giridih.
741. Sachindeo Kumar, son of Sukhdeo Prasad Verma, resident of
Village - Bhaluwahi, P.O. - Chiknadih, P.S.-Deori, District -
Giridih.
742. Prasant Kumar, son of Deepak Kumar Deepak, resident of
House No. 01, Professor Colony, Near Women's College, P.O.-
Giridih, P.S.-Giridih, District-Giridih.
743. Sunil Prasad Kushwaha, son of Prakash Mahto, resident of
Village + P.O. Digwar, P.S. - Mandu, District - Ramgarh.
744. Kumari Neera, daughter of Late Nilkanth Prasad Lala,
resident of W/O Sanjeev Kumar Sinha, Katras Bazar, Lala
Tola, Shamdih, P.O.-Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad, District -
Dhanbad.
745. Manik Chandra Mahatha, son of Anil Chandra Mahatha,
resident of Village - Lalpur, P.O. - Kumirdova, Chandan Kiyari,
P.S. - Bokaro, District - Bokaro.
746. Upendra Pandey, son of Sudarshan Pandey, resident of Near
Aircel Tawar, Village-Bankali Mandir Road, P.O. - Govindpur,
P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.
747. Triveni Kumar Mahatha, son of Shankar Mahatha, resident of
38
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
P.O. Narayanpur, P.S. - Pindrajora, Village - Kamaldih, District
- Bokaro.
748. Manoj Kumar Mahato, son of Loknath Mahato, resident of
Near Shiv Mandir, Pathra Gora, Panderpala, P.O.-Bishunpur,
P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.
749. Preety Verma, daughter of Shyam Verma, resident of
Fatehpur Lane, Jharia, Jharna, P.O. - Jharia, P.S. - Dhanbad,
District - Dhanbad.
750. Razak Ansari, son of Jamiruddin Ansari, resident of
Raghunathpur, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. Govindpur, P.S. -
Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad.
751. Subhash Mahato, son of Rushan Mahato, resident of House
No. 292, Village - Pathar Kata Side, P.O. -Chas, P.S.-Bokaro,
District - Bokaro.
752. Sunita Kumari, daughter of Nimai Chandra Rawani, resident
of Narodih, P.O. - Ambona, P.S. -Khilkanali, District -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
753. Subhash Chandra Mahato, son of Phalu Mahato, resident of
Vill.-Orbhitha Parsabaniya, P.O.-Khasjinagoda, P.S. - Suranga,
District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
754. Shubham Raj, son of Shailendra Kumar, resident of Flat G/B
Nirmal Tower Apartment, Saraidhela Main Road, P.K. Roy
College, Veer Kunwar Singh Colony, Dhaiya, P.O. - Indian
School of Mines, P.S. - Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
755. Satya Deo Das, son of Laldhari Das, resident of Back of Tata
Tower, Nutandih, Jagjiwan Nagar, P.O.-Dhanbad, P.S.-
Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
756. Pramjeet Kumar, son of Yogendra Prasad, resident of Near
Bhagat Ji Mandir, Manaitand, P.O. -Manaitand, P.S. -
Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
757. Chandan Kumar Saw, son of -, resident of Near Hanuman
Mandir, Kurmidih, Chhotpichhri, P.O.-Dhanbad, P.S. -
Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
758. Dhananjay Kumar, son of Subhash Chandra, resident of
Mahabir Nagar, Near India Tower, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S. -
Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
759. Prem Shankar Rajak, son of Bhola Rajak, resident of
Bhagabandh, P.O. - Bhagabandh, P.S. - Dhanbad, District -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
760. Ajay Kumar Rajak, son of Butan Rajak, resident of P.O. -
Kankomath, P.S. - Katras, Gargaria, District - Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
761. Rahul Kumar Jha, son of Shankar Sharan Jha, resident of c/o
- Surendra Singh, Chiragora, Samshan Road, Hirapur, Near
Bhagwati Jagrit Mandir, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S.-Dhanbad,
District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
762. Bikash Kumar Yadav, son of Balkrishan Yadav, resident of
Vill.- Guglidih, Ward No. 16, P.O. -Satsang, P.S. - Deoghar,
District - Deoghar, Jharkhand.
763. Nishu Kumar Sinha, son of Nand Kishor Prasad Sinha,
resident of Vill.-Daraysharan, P.O. - Naya Sankho, P.S. -
39
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Deori, District - Giridih, Jharkhand.
764. Prakash Das, son of Rawan Das, resident of Vill. - Chandpur,
P.O. - Daburgram, P.S. - Jasidih, District -Deoghar,
Jharkhand.
765. Ravi Kumar, son of Binod Kumar Rajak, resident of Baradih,
P.O. Bhendra, P.S. Bokaro, District -Bokaro, Jharkhand.
766. Kunal Kumar, son of Krishn Kant Goswami, resident of Loco
Bazar, Hariharpur, P.S. & P.O. - Gomo, District - Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
767. Md. Ashfaque Nayeem, son of Md. Nayeem Ul Haque,
resident of 47 Niche Kulhi, Near Mini ITI Jharia, Jharna, P.O.
Jharia, P.S.-Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
768. Arun Prasad Saw, son of Bhanu Prasad Saw, resident of Vill.-
Hariyadih, P.O.-Kalyanpur, P.S. Barwadda, District - Dhanbad,
Jharkhand.
769. Tarakant Sardar, son of Thakur Das Sardar, resident of P.O. -
Pundru, P.S. - Pindrajora, Alokdih (Barshabad), District -
Bokaro, Jharkhand.
770. Pradeep Kumar Das, son of Badal Kumar Das, resident of
Vill.- Amjhar, P.O. - Baliapur, P.S. - Baliapur, District -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
771. Pankaj Marandi, son of Mahadev Marandi, resident of Tetulia,
Susunliya, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad, District -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
772. Niharika Singh, daughter of Rajendra Kumar Singh, resident
of Akash Kinari, Panchrukhi, Katrasgarh, P.O. Katrasgarh, P.S.
Katras, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
773. Bablu Kumhar, Aged son of Rameshwar Kumhar, resident of
Kamta, Madaidih, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S. -Dhanbad, District -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
774. Rahul Kumar, son of Mritunjay Pandey, resident of Yadav
Tola, Korkotta, Hariharpur, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S.-Dhanbad,
District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
775. Sanjeev Kumar Murmu, son of Moti Lal Murmu, resident of
Vill.-Bhimkanali, Khanoodih, Baghmara, VTC-Matigara,
Katras, P.O. & P.S.-Katras, District -Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
776. Chatur Hansda, son of Rasik Hansda, resident of P.O. Khario,
P.S. Barora, Sogedih, District -Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
777. Krishna Marandi, son of Hariram Manjhi, resident of Vill.-
Jamdiha, P.S. Mahuda, Lohpiti, P.O. Dhanbad, District -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
778. Ruma Kumari, daughter of Raghav Kumbhakar, resident of
Vill-Kharkabad, P.O. - Barwa East, P.S. Govindpur, Parasi,
District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
779. Varsha Rani, daughter of Binod Prasad Mahto, resident of
Narkopi, Dumdumi, Alias, P.O. - Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad,
District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
780. Pramod Kumar, son of Dilip Kumar Singh, resident of Vill -
Lulutand, P.O. - Galgaltand, Chandan Kiyari, P.S. - Chandan
Kiyari, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.
781. Sonamani Kumari, daughter of Tarapad Sharma, resident of
M No-75, P.O. -Chiksiya, P.S. - Chas MU Chiksiya, District -
40
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Bokaro, Jharkhand.
782. Sujit Kumar, son of Ram Chandra Ram, resident of Rani Road
Bhuda, Shivpuri Colony, P.O. Dhanbad, P.S. - Dhanbad,
District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
783. Nirmal Mahato, son of Dinbandhu Mahato, resident of Vill. &
P.O - Kaljharia, Geria, P.S.-Jamtara, District -Jamtara,
Jharkhand.
784. Rakesh Kumar Mahto, son of Binanda Mahto, resident of Vill.-
Kalajhariya, P.O. & P.S. - Geria, Jamtara, District - Jamtara,
Jharkhand.
785. Madhusudan Pandit, son of Shashti Pandit, resident of Vill.-
Bhogikata, VTC + P.O. - Geria, Sub Dist-Nala, P.S.-Nala,
District-Jamtara.
786. Bhudev Kumar Singh, son of Baikunth Nath Singh, resident of
Vill.- Kalajharia, P.O.-Geria, P.S.-Nala, District - Jamtara,
Jharkhand.
787. Ranjit Kumar Pandit, son of Satish Pandit, resident of
Bhogikata, Shripur, P.O. Geria, P.S. Nala, District-Jamtara,
Jharkhand.
788. Sanjay Kumar, son of Narwadeshwar Pandey, resident of
H.No. 86, Prabhat Colony, P.O. - Chas, P.S.-Chas, District -
Bokaro, Jharkhand.
789. Mukesh Kumar Mahato, son of Nilkanth Mahato, resident of
P.O. - Rangamatiya, P.S. - Chandankiyari, Alokdih, District -
Bokaro, Jharkhand.
790. Rajeev Kumar, son of Amulya Kumar, resident of Shankardi,
Ρ.Ο.-Dhanbad, P.S. Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
791. Parikshit Singh, son of Anant Kumar Singh Choudhary,
resident of Kura, P.O.-Labudih, P.S.-Bokaro, District - Bokaro,
Jharkhand.
792. Ram Kishun Mahto, Aged about 31 years, Son of Nageshwar
Mahto, Resident of Vill Hariyadih, P.O. Kalyanpur, P.S. -
Govindpur, Barwadda, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
793. Rajkumar Saw, son of Manejar Mahato, resident of Vill -
Udaypur, P.O. - Kalyanpur, P.S. - Govindpur, Dhanbad, District
- Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
794. Uttam Kumar Mahato, son of Jaleshwar Mahato, resident of
Kachhi Balihari, P.O. & P.S.- Kusunda, Near Shakti School,
Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
795. Chandni Kumari, daughter of Maheswar Manjhi, resident of
H.No.-69, near Shiv Mandir, Vill.-Rangadih, P.O.-
Pradhankhanta, P.S. - Topchanchi, Gopalpur, District -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
796. Kundan Kumar, son of Suresh Prasad Singh, resident of
207/D, Hill Colony, Near Railway Hospital, P.O.-Dhanbad, P.S.-
Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
797. Mritunjay Kumar Choudhary, son of Jawahar Lal Choudhary,
Resident of Tundi, P.O. - Tundi, P.S. -Dhanbad, District -
Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
798. Manjesh Kumar Mahatha, son of Thakur Prasad Mahatha,
resident of H.No. 7, Bhandhagora, P.O. -Chas, P.S. Chas,
District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.
41
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
799. Indrawati Kumari, daughter of Ghamandi Paswan, resident of
W/o Prasanjeet Kumar Paswan, P.O.-Oriya, P.S.-Hazaraibagh,
District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand.
800. Manjeet Kumar Paswan, son of Lakhan Ram Paswan, resident
of P.O.-Oreya, P.S. - Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh,
Jharkhand.
801. Ashish Kumar Mandal, son of Satya Narayan Mandal, resident
of Vill - Jaypur, P.O.- Barwadda, P.S. - Barwadda, District -
Dhanbad.
802. Subhash Kumar, son of Sachidanand Singh, Resident of Vill.-
Mangrodih, P.O.-Dandidih, P.S.-Giridih (Muff), District -
Giridih.
803. Rahul Dangi, son of Narendra Dangi, resident of Bajobar, P.O.
- Nawadih, P.S. - Pathalgada, District - Chatra.
804. Sanjeev Kumar, son of Yamuna Kumar, resident of Gaira, P.O.
Chuglamo, P.S. Deori, District -Giridih.
805. Md. Siddique Khan, son of Md. Samsul Hoda Khan, resident
of H.No.-40, Tapkara Khas, Barda, P.O., P.S. & District-Khunti.
806. Sumit Kumar, son of Lilu Saw, resident of Vill - Kadma No. 2,
P.O. - Kadma, P.S. - Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.
807. Bikas Kumar, son of Yugal Kishor, resident of Vill.-Bhaluwahi,
P.O.-Chiknadih, P.S. - Deori, District - Giridih.
808. Raj Roshan, son of Rajesh Saw, resident of Vill.-
Jagannathdih, P.O. - Mirzaganj, P.S. Jamua, District - Giridih.
809. Amar Kumar, son of Bal Krishan Prasad Mehta, resident of
Nagwan, P.O., P.S. & District- Hazaribagh.
810. Dhirendra Yadav, son of Ramkishun Yadav, resident of
Alagdiha, Maskedih, P.O. , P.S. & District - Hazaribagh.
811. Khagendra Kumar, son of Jodhan Prasad Yadav, resident of
Vill.-Ghanghari, P.O.-Dharagulli, P.S. -Bagodar, District -
Giridih.
812. Kailash Saw, son of Bhuneshwar Shaw, resident of Kharaun,
P.O. , P.S. & District - Hazaribagh.
813. Priyanka Kumari, daughter of Rajesh Kumar Gupta, resident
of Thana - Barhi, P.O. - Rasoia, P.S.-Dhamna, District -
Hazaribagh.
814. Babulal Kumar, son of Nanhu Mahto, resident of Pagar,
Chatti, Bariatu, Tandwa, P.O. & P.S. - Hazaribagh, District -
Hazaribagh.
815. Pramod Kumar, son of Basudeo Saw, resident of Vill - Penk,
P.O. Penk, P.S. Nawadih, District -Bokaro.
816. Shubham Kumar, son of Praveen Kumar Singh, resident of
Vill.-Tetariadih, P.O. - Domchanch Bazar, P.S.-Koderma,
District - Koderma.
817. Rahul Kumar Singh, son of Satendra Kumar Singh, resident
of Vill Kandabar, P.O. - Ghanghari, P.S.-Huntarganj, District -
Chatra.
818. Kapil Dew Kumar Mahto, son of Ramchandra Mahto, resident
of Mundro, P.O., P.S. & District -Giridih.
819. Suraj Kumar Tiwari, son of Raghubir Tiwari, resident of 47,
Dumbi, P.O.-Dumi, P.S. - Chatra, District-Chatra.
820. Tejlal Yadav, son of Nunulal Yadav, resident of Vill -
42
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Ambatand, P.O. - Kuhrobindo, P.S. - Jamua, District - Giridih.
821. Sachin Kumar, son of Suresh Prasad Kushwaha, resident of
P.S.-Katkamsaandi, P.O.-Lupung, P.S. - Kanchanpur, District -
Hazaribagh.
822. Mithlesh Kumar Gupta, son of Bhuneshwar Saw, resident of
76A, Shaharjam, P.O., P.S. & District-Chatra.
823. Manish Kumar Soni, son of Vijay Prasad Soni, resident of
P.O.+P.S.-Ichak, District-Hazaribagh.
824. Uttam Kumar, son of Jitendra Kumar, resident of Selari, P.O.,
P.S. & District - Koderma.
825. Mukesh Kumar Roy, son of Upendra Roy, resident of Salidih,
P.O.-Tisri. P.S. & District - Giridih.
826. Shruti Rani Roy, daughter of Basant Ray, resident of Block -
Dhanwar, P.O. - Kubri, District - Giridih.
827. Prantosh Kumar Singh, son of Digamber Singh, resident of
Selhara Kala, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District -Hazaribagh.
828. Manoj Munda, son of Karma Munda, resident of 12, Sirka
Near Primary School, P.O. & P.S. - Gola, District -Ramgarh.
829. Sitaram Kumar, son of Balo Saw, resident of Vill - Nawadih,
P.O. & P.S.-Baraini, District - Giridih.
830. Ranjeet Nath Goswami, son of Indradev Nath Goswami,
resident of Ward No. 03, Panchayat Murukmanai, P.O. & P.S.
Markacho, District - Koderma.
831. Shubham Shekhar, son of Deonarayan Saw, resident of Vill.-
Jarwa, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District- Hazaribagh.
832. Santosh Kumar Paswan, son of Suresh Ram, resident of Vill -
Pandeydih, P.O. - Sirsiya, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.
833. Ranjeet Paswan, son of Naresh Ram, resident of Vill.-
Manjhiladih, P.O. - Dhoranji, P.S. - Dewari, District - Giridih.
834. Anup Kumar, son of Kedar Singh, resident of Kotwar Muhla,
Ward No. 5, P.S. & P.O.- Markacho, District - Koderma.
835. Mithlesh Kumar Singh, son of Rajendra Singh, resident of
Hazari Dhamna, Gauria Karma, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh,
District - Hazaribagh.
836. Ashutosh Kumar, son of Sukhdeo Prasad, resident of Lakhe,
P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District- Hazaribagh.
837. Praveen Kumar, son of Baidyanath Yadav, resident of P.S.-
Dhanwar, P.O.-Karmatand, P.S.-Murna, District-Giridih.
838. Shubhendu Kumar Suman. son of Rajkumar Yadav, resident
of P.S. - Deori, P.O. - Ghutia, P.S. -Kisgo, District - Giridih.
839. Sonu Modi, son of Ramdeo Modi, resident of Panchayat
Navadih Black Sariya Gamv Choudharidih, P.O. - Sabalpur,
P.S. - Sariya, District - Giridih.
840. Tikeshwar Kumar, son of Chhedi Saw, resident of Daru
Kharika, P.O. & P.S. -Hazaribagh, District- Hazaribagh.
841. Sumit Kumar, son of Virendra Kumar Gupta, resident of Daru
Kharika, P.O. & P.S. - Hazaribagh, District -Hazaribagh.
842. Pankaj Kumar, son of Rajkumar Das, resident of 96 Harizan
Mohalla, Ward No. 20, P.O. - Jhumri Telaiya, P.S. & District -
Koderma.
843. Shivam Kumar Verma, son of Arjun Pd Verma, resident of
Vill.-Karihari, P.O.-Karihari, P.S.-Hirodih, District - Giridih.
43
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
844. Subham Kumar Bhaghat, son of Pradip Prasad Bhaghat,
resident of Vill Khairbani, P.O.-Khaibani, P.S. & District -
Dumka.
845. Vivek Kumar Pandey, son of Sukhdew Pandey, resident of
Panchayat - South Doranda Dhanwar, Vill & P.O. - Sabladih,
P.S.-Doranda, District - Giridih.
846. Sachin Kumar, son of Basant Safi, resident of Karmali Tola
Near Shiv Mandir, Mandudih, P.O. & P.S.-Ramgarh, District -
Ramgarh.
847. Vishal Kumar, son of Firangi Thakur, resident of Gargali,
Manduchatti, P.O. & P.S.-Mandu, District Ramgarh.
848. Gango Kumar Yadav, son of Prabhu Yadav, resident of
Kolgarma, P.O. & P.S.-Koderma, District- Koderma.
849. Kundan Soni, son of Raju Soni, resident of Gondha Toli, P.O.
& P.S.- Jharpo, District - Hazaribagh.
850. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, son of Ramchandra Yadav, Resident of
P.O.-Indarwa, P.S.-Koderma, P.O.-Jharitand, District-Koderma.
851. Dhaneshwar Mahto, son of Narayan Mahto, resident of H.No-
03, Shankardih Tola, Kodwadih, P.O. - Galagi, P.S. -
Nimiyaghat and District - Giridih.
852. Birendra Kumar, son of Ruplal Prajapati, resident of Bharajo,
P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribag and District Hazaribagh.
853. Dharmendra Kumar Bhokta, son of Kauleshwar Singh Bhokta,
resident of Vill- Bengokata, P.O.-Laralutubag, P.S.-Chatra and
District - Chatra.
854. Dharmendra Kumar, son of Basdeo Mahto, resident of
Panchayat Nawadih, Vill- Nawadih, Dumma, P.O. - Jamua,
P.S. - Giridih and District - Giridih.
855. Jayshree Mandal, daughter of Pradip Kumar Mandal, resident
of H.No- 23, Vill+P.O. - Sarsa, P.S. -Palajori and District -
Deoghar.
856. Aryan Kumar, son of Digamber Modi, resident of 72, Station
Road, Saria, Khurd, P.O. & P.S. -Giridih and District-Giridih.
857. Bhuneshwar Kumar, son of Jagdish Mahto, resident of
Bagodar, Pashchimi Bagodar, Vill-Ambadih, P.O. - Dondlo, P.S.
- Giridih and District - Giridih.
858. Subhash Kumar, son of Harihar Sahu, resident of P.O.-
Barkattha, P.S.-Kalhabar and District Hazaribagh.
859. Nitish Kumar, son of Dinanath Kumar, resident of Khoda Ahar,
P.O. - Deochanda, P.S. - Hazaribagh and District -
Hazaribagh.
860. Saket Sethi, son of Late Bishwa Pati Sethi, resident of
Nawabgunj, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District- Hazaribagh.
861. Manish Kumar Yadav, son of Hiralal Yadav, resident of
Barano/ Banka, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, and District-
Hazaribagh.
862. Rambilas Yadav, son of Bhuneshwar Yadav, resident of Ward
no-03, Gadgi, P.O.-Jainagar, P.S.-Parsabad and District -
Koderma.
863. Sujeet Kumar, son of Santosh Modi, resident of Vill+P.O. -
Ratabahiyar, P.S. - Gandey and District - Giridih.
864. Zafar Iqbal, son of Abdul Qaiyum, resident of Sakhiya, P.O. &
44
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
P.S.- Hazaribagh and District Hazaribagh.
865. Satyendra Kumar, son of Basudeo Saw, resident of Vill-
Lamta, P.O. Shivrajpur, VTC-Lamta, P.S.- Chatra and District -
Chatra.
866. Shyam Kumar Verma, son of Tribhwan Mahto, resident of
Chai Kalan, P.O. & P.S. - Hazaribagh and District -
Hazaribagh.
867. Kumari Nitu, daughter of Ishwar Dayal Gope, resident of
Kanimundwar, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District -
Hazaribagh.
868. Ravi Kumar, son of Haricharan Rajak, resident of Haiga
School Muhalla, Jori Kalan, P.O. & P.S. - Chatra and District
Chatra.
869. Kumari Ritu, daughter of Ishwar Dayal Gope, resident of
Kanimundwar, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District -
Hazaribagh.
870. Suman Kumar Thakur, son of Premlal Thakur, resident of
Minus Type 2-330, Near Ganesh Mandir, Rajrappa Project,
Sanri, P.O. & P.S.-Ramgarh, and District-Ramgarh.
871. Alok Ranjan Prabhat, son of Yogendra Kumar, resident of Vill-
Gardih, P.O. - Jantajaridih, P.S. - Birni, Arari, P.O. - Palounjai,
P.S. - Giridih and District - Giridih.
872. Abhimanyu Mandal, son of Pachu Mandal, resident of Vill-
Chaundhibad, P.O. - Parsiya, P.S. -Suriya, Amnari, P.O. -
Giridih and District - Giridih.
873. Pradeep Mahto, son of Kameshwar Mahto, resident of Vill-
Rola, P.O. - Maganpur, P.S. - Gola and District-Ramgarh.
874. Kundan Kumar, son of Arun Kumar Roy, resident of 75,
Kolghatti, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District -Hazaribagh.
875. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, son of Ratan Gop, resident of Kolghatti,
P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, and District- Hazaribagh.
876. Bharat Kumar Singh, son of Byash Singh, resident of Vill-
Mangrodih, P.O. - Dandidih, P.S. - Giridih and District -
Giridih.
877. Vikram Kumar Pandey, son of Ashok Kumar Pandey, resident
of Vill- Mangrodih, P.O. & P.S.- Dandidih and District - Giridih.
878. Sandeep Kumar, son of Arjun Saw, resident of Vill- Saharjam,
P.O.-Karni, P.S. - Itkhori and District Chatra.
879. Pradeep Kumar, son of Tukan Mahto, resident of Kutipisi,
P.O.- Padma, O.P. Nawadih Kalan, P.S. - Hazaribagh and
District - Hazaribagh.
880. Deepak Kumar, son of Karu Saw, resident of Near Shiv
Mandir, Bedhana Bara, Dadpur, P.S. & P.O-Chouparan and
District - Hazaribagh.
881. Prakash Prasad, son of Bhuneshwar Mahto, resident of P.O.-
Barkattha, P.S. - Pesra, Gangpacho and District - Hazaribagh.
882. Shishir Prasad, son of Harihar Saw, resident of P.S. -
Barkattha, P.O.-Kalhabar and District -Hazaribagh.
883. Reetesh Kumar, son of Teknarayan Mahto, resident of P.S.
Katkamsandi, P.O.-Lupung, Kanchanpur and District -
Hazaribagh.
884. Sagar Kumar Das, son of Sakendra Ram, resident of Vill-
45
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Dhangada Rakshi, P.O. - Dhangada, P.S.- Tandwa and District
- Chatra.
885. Shubham Kumar, son of Gauri Prasad, resident of Bagra and
P.O., P.S. & District - Chatra.
886. Vijay Kumar Saw, son of Naresh Saw, resident of H.no- 39D,
P.O. - Pobi, Vill- Pobi, P.S. - Jamua and District-Giridih.
887. Nandkishor Paswan, son of Basdeo Paswan, resident of P.O.-
Bagodar, P.S. - Jarmunni, Sonturpi and District - Giridih.
888. Shubham Sagar, son of Rajiv Mishra, resident of Akhara
Chouk Chedra, Bishungarh, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and
District - Hazaribagh.
889. Suman Saurav, son of Tapeshwar Kumar, resident of Guru
Chalti, Barkagaon P.O., P.S. and District - Hazaribagh.
890. Satish Kumar Mishra, son of Ramkumar Mishra, resident of
Bargadda, Bahimar P.O., P.S. & District Hazaribagh.
891. Abhay Kumar Sinha, son of Lalan Prasad, resident of 514 B,
Ram Nagar Path no. 8, P.S.-Sadar, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh,
District - Hazaribagh.
892. Ranjan Kumar Sinha, son of Mithilesh Kumar Sinha, resident
of Gali no-8, Near Ram Mandir, Ram Nagar, P.O. & P.S. -
Hazaribagh and District - Hazaribagh.
893. Shailesh Kumar Choubey, son of Parmanand Choubey,
resident of 622, P.O.-Kadma, P.S.-Katkamsandi and District -
Hazaribagh.
894. Pintu Kumar, son of Vishnudeo Sah, resident of Kadma,
Hazaribagh and P.O., P.S. & District - Hazaribagh.
895. Anil Kumar, son of Yugal Kishore Prasad, resident of Barka
Kalan Ratanpur Ichak, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh and District -
Hazaribagh.
896. Praveen Kumar Barnwal, son of Satyanarayan Barnwal,
resident of Arkhango, Via Domchanch Bazar, P.O., P.S. &
District - Giridih.
897. Ajay Kumar Ram, son of Lakshmi Ram, resident of H.no-5 I,
Nero, P.S. 284, Hirodih, P.O. & P.S.- Remba and District -
Giridih.
898. Ajeet Barnwal, son of Shaligram Modi, resident of P.S. -
Rajdhanwar, Arkhango, P.O., P.S. & District - Giridih.
899. Shashi Kumar Modi, son of Late Shankar Modi, resident of
Vill- Jaridih, P.O.-Janta, P.S.- Birni and District - Giridih.
900. Ajay Yadav, son of Subhash Yadav, Pathaldiha, P.S. Koderma,
resident of Ward no-1, P.O.-Garhai, Kodarma and District -
Koderma.
901. Jenet Kerketta, daughter of Bhadwa Kerketta, resident of
Kamdara, Bamhandih, P.O. - Gumla, P.S. - Gumla, District -
Gumla.
902. Bikash Kumar Sharma, son of Dashrath Prasad Sharma,
resident of 103, Shastri Nagar, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. -
Giridih, P.S. - Giridih, District - Giridih.
903. Rahul Kumar Chandrawanshi, son of Anil Chandrawanshi,
resident of Hazaribagh Road Barhi, P.O. Barhi, P.S. - Barhi,
District - Hazaribagh.
904. Dhiraj Kumar, son of Ramchandra Ram, resident of Bonga,
46
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Berdhna, P.O. - Berdhna, P.S. - Hazaribagh, District -
Hazaribagh.
905. Abhinandan Kumar Dangi, son of Ram Bachan Deo Dangi,
resident of Vill - Dhodhi, P.O.-Mandhaniya, P.S.-Itkhori,
District-Chatra.
906. Deepak Kumar, son of Nandlal Mahto, resident of Badaka,
Chumba, Uchringa Tola, P.O. - Giddi, P.S. - Giddi, District -
Ramgarh.
907. Anil Kumar Shaw, son of Karoo Shaw, resident of Ward No.
13, Vill-Kanjhiyadih, Panchayat-Dandadih, P.O. - Jainagar, P.S.
- Jainagar, District - Koderma.
908. Vikash Kumar, son of Rama Mahato, resident of Ward No. 5,
P.O. - Markachcho, P.S. - Markachcho, District - Koderma.
909. Jyotindra Kumar, son of Dilip Singh, resident of Panchayat -
Pobi, Block - Jamua, Vill-Sandih, P.O. - Mirzaganj, P.S. -
Jamua, District - Giridih.
910. Sweta Kumari, daughter of Horil Kumar, resident of 57,
Chhotki Pona Koyri Tika, near Vishwkarma Chauk, P.O. -
Barki Pona, P.S. - Rajrappa, District - Ramgarh.
911. Ramesh Kumar Mahto, son of Hari Mahto, resident of Tunda,
P.O.-Pandu, P.S.-Pandu, District -Hazaribagh.
912. Kundan Kumar Bakshi, son of Umesh Prasad Bakshi, resident
of 544, Okni, Adarsh Puri, P.O.-Hazaribagh, P.S. - Sadar
Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.
913. Vinnet Kumar, son of Satendra Singh, resident of Vill-Ghujji,
P.O.-Yadav Nagar, P.S. - Tanrwa, District - Chatra.
914. Bahadur Saw, son of Bandhan Saw resident of Gram -
Bekobar, P.O. - Bekobar, P.S. - Koderma, District - Koderma.
915. Davendra Kumar Saw, son of Munshi Saw, resident of
Kolgarma, P.O. - Koderma, P.S. - Koderma, District -
Koderma.
916. Gupta Mayakumari Birendrakumar, daughter of Birendra
Kumar Gupta, resident of C/o Rajshekhar Kumar, Vill -
Bekobar, P.S. & P.O.-Koderma, District -Koderma.
917. Ramswrup Ram, son of Kishun Ram, resident of P.O. -
Rampur, Petula, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District -Hazaribagh.
918. Shakuntala Kumari, daughter of Late Nageshwar Saw,
resident of Street Amgawan, P.O. - Shila, P.S. Simariya, VTC -
Amgawan, District - Chatra.
919. Agraj Kumar, son of Mahavir Yadav, resident of 50, Gaushala
Road, Beside Talab, Ward 25, Jhumri Tilaiya, P.O.-Jhumri
Tilaiya, P.S.-Koderma, District Koderma.
920. Sitara Kumari, daughter of Koushal Kumar Mehta, resident of
Gunja, P.O.-Gunja, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.
921. Pallawi Kumari, daughter of Ranvijay Prasad Mehta, resident
of Gunja, P.O.-Gunja, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.
922. Laxmi Kumari, daughter of Arun Kumar Mehta, resident of
P.O. Barhi, P.S.- Kadwa, District Hazaribagh.
923. Manoj Kumar, son of Kameshwar Yadav, resident of
Berokala, Barkatha, P.O.-Barkatha, P.S.-Barkatha, District-
Hazaribagh.
924. Bikash Kumar, son of Puran Mahto, resident of Manjhli Dari,
47
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Chepa Kalan, P.O. Chepa Kalan, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District -
Hazaribagh.
925. Ramashish Kushwaha, son of Khirodhar Mahto, resident of
Harli, P.O.-Harli, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh.
926. Rahul Kumar Gupta, son of Anil Kumar Gupta, resident of
Hazaribagh Road, Near Kali Mandir, Barkagaon, P.Ο.-
Barkagaon, P.S. Barkagaon, District- Hazaribagh
927. Sadanand Kumar, son of Rajkumar Rana, resident of Vill-
Purnabarhan, P.O.-Chatro, P.S.- Deori, District - Giridih.
928. Shubhum Kumar Pandey, son of Shashibhushan Pandey,
resident of P.S.-Gorhar, Belkapi, P.O. - Hazaribagh, District -
Hazaribagh.
929. Vimal Kumar Mahto, son of Pritlal Mahto, resident of Vill-
Hosir, P.O.-Dari, P.S. Giddi-A, Kanki, District - Hazaribagh.
930. Vijay Kumar Gupta, son of Raj Harish Gupta, resident of
Jabra Road Korrah Muhalla, P.O. - Korrah, P.S.-Sadar, District
- Hazaribagh.
931. Shivani Kumari, daughter of Om Prakash Gupta, resident of
Ward No. 06, Panchayat Jamu, P.S. & P.O.-Markacho, District
- Koderma.
932. Prakash Kumar, son of Bandhan Saw, resident of P.O.-
Bekobar, P.S.-Koderma, District- Koderma.
933. Krishna Oraon, son of Birsa Oraon, resident of Vill - Lbed,
P.O.-Tiril Ashram, Dhurwa, P.S. -Dhurwa, District - Ranchi.
934. Sanoj Kumar Munda, son of Laxman Munda, resident of
Manatu, Ormanjhi, P.O. - Ormanjhi, P.S. -Ormanjhi, District -
Ranchi.
935. Rajshekhar Kumar, son of Ramsahay Saw, resident of P.O.-
Bekobar, P.S. Koderma, District-Koderma.
936. Bikash Kumar, son of Chandrika Prasad, resident of Ward No.
06, Panchayat Jamu, P.S. - Markacho, P.O. & District -
Koderma.
937. Gautam Keshri, son of Jugal Prasad Keshri, resident of 343,
Kumar Toli Chowk, Near Devi Mandap, P.O.-Boddom Bazar,
P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.
938. Sanjay Kumar, aged about 28 years, son of Sahdeo Saw,
resident of 122, Jugra, Barkagaon, Chepa Kalan, P.O.
Barkagaon, P.S. - Barkagaon, District - Hazaribagh.
939. Shishupal Kumar, son of Bhuwneshwar Dangi, resident of
Gidhaur, P.O.-Gidhaur, P.S.-Chatra, District - Chatra.
940. Mantu Kumar Mehta, son of Mahesh Mehta, resident of Post-
Ratanpur Fufundi, Panchayat Dadhighaghar, P.O.-Ratanpur,
P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.
941. Raju Rana, son of Bhuneshwar Rana, resident of Vill-Peltoul
Khurd, P.O.-Peltoul Kala, P.S.-Rajpur, District - Chatra.
942. Sudeep Kumar, son of Nakul Prasad Mehta, resident of
Ratanpur, near Hanuman Mandir, Barka Khurd, P.O.-Barka
Khurd, P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh.
943. Ravi Ranjan, son of Kailash Prasad, resident of Flat No. 105,
Block B, Bokaro Steel Officers Housing Co-op. Society Ltd.
Jain Hospital Sector 8/C, Ranopokhar, P.O. - Baidhmara, P.S. -
Bokaro Steel City, District - Bokaro.
48
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
944. Satyanarayan Kumar, son of Arjun Prasad Kushwaha, resident
of P.S. - Ichak, P.O. - Bariyath, P.S. - Sirsi, District -
Hazaribagh.
945. Birendra Rana, son of Arjun Rana, resident of Gram - Bundu,
P.O. - Dadighaghr, P.S. - Padma OP, District - Hazaribagh.
946. Jitendra Kumar, son of Shankar Mistri, resident of Guriya,
Partappur, P.O. - Partappur, P.S. - Chatra, District Chatra.
947. Rimpal Kumari, daughter of Nand Kishor Prasad, resident of
Babhne, Pratappur, P.O. Pratappur, P.S. - Chatra, District -
Chatra.
948. Anand Charles Minz, son of Paulus Minz, resident of Near
Palloti Church Tati, Dumar Toil, P.O. - Kuru, P.S.-Kuru Tati,
District - Lohardaga.
949. Karan Kumar, son of Durga Charan Mishra, resident of P.O.-
Pupunki Ashram, P.S. - Chas Mu, District Bokaro.
950. Laxmi Kumari, daughter of Tun Tun Ram, resident of House
No. 285, Church Road, Chandrapura, New Basti, Pipradih
Church Road, P.O.-Chandrapura, P.S.-Bokaro, District-Bokaro.
951. Mamta Kumari, daughter of Tuntun Ram, resident of House
no 285, Church Road, Chandrapura, New Basti, Pipradih
Church Road, Bokaro, P.O.-Bokaro, P.S.-Bokaro, District-
Bokaro.
952. Ramesh Kumar Singh, son of Ramdhir Singh, resident of Vill-
Okaraha, P.O.-Chhattarpur, P.S.-Chhattarpur, District -
Palamu.
953. Rinku Kumari, daughter of Nemchand Modi, resident of C/O
Rajesh Kumar, Marwari muhalla, Chatra, P.O.-Chatra, P.S.
Chatra, District - Chatra.
954. Ravish Chandra, son of Girindra Prasad Gupta, resident of
Purana Petrol Pump, P.S. & P.O. - Chatra, District -Chatra.
955. Ritesh Kumar Gupta, son of Gopal Prasad Gupta, resident of
Near Hyundai Showroom, Harmu Road, Kishor Ganj, Ranchi
G.P.O., P.O.-Ranchi, P.S.-Ranchi, District-Ranchi.
956. Minakshi Bera, daughter of Sachinandan Bera, resident of
Vill- Bankdaha, Tola - Nutandihi Guhiyapal, P.O., P.S. &
District - East Singhbhum.
957. Sandeep Kumar Munda, son of Seken Munda, resident of Jui
Road, Pramothnagar, Parsudih, P.O. Tatanagar, P.S. -
Parsudih, District - Purbi Singhbhum.
958. Subhjeeet Munda, son of Seken Munda, resident of
Pramothnagar, Parsudih, Sidhu Kanhu Chowk, P.O. -
Tatanagar, P.S. - Parsudih, District - Purbi Singhbhum.
959. Amit Mandal, son of Jagdish Prasad Mandal, resident of
Gangudih, Pundidah, P.O., P.S. & District Seraikela
Kharsawan.
960. Ramanuj Kumar, son of Vijay Kumar Singh, resident of Vill-
Ramnagar, P.O. Kadma, P.S.-Hazaribag, District - Hazaribag.
961. Prakash Deogam, son of Rajesh Singh Deogam, resident of
Vill- Domardiha, P.O.-Barkundia, P.S.-Muffasil, District -
Chaibasa.
962. Laxmi Biruly, daughter of Chemeya Biruly, W/O Thakur Singh
Purty, resident of P.O. - Tutugutu, P.S.-Thinkpani, District -
49
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Pashchimi Singhbhum.
963. Sunita Kumari Soy, daughter of Budhan Lal Soy, resident of
117, Kuchai, P.O. & P.S.-Kuchai, District-Saraikela Kharsawan.
964. Neelwanti Deogam, daughter of Prem Chand Deogam,
resident of P.O.-Barkundia, P.S. - Muffasil, District Chaibasa.
965. Rajesh Kumar, son of Arjun Bakshi, resident of C-3 Vatika
Green City, Dimna Road, Mango, P.O. -Mango, P.S.-Mango,
District - East Singhbhum.
966. Bikash Mahato, son of Arun Chandra Mahato, resident of P.O.
& P.S.-Janum, Karargama, Shirum, District -Seraikela
Kharsawan.
967. Kumar Praveen Sao, son of Sushil Chandra Gope, resident of
P.O.-Chitimiti, P.S.-Manjhari, District -West Singhbhum.
968. Jayhind Kumar, son of Subodh Kumar, resident of Vill-
Pokhariya, P.O.- Kenduwa. P.S. -Hansadih, District-Dumka.
969. Harendra Kumar Singh, son of Arun Kumar Singh, resident of
Gram Jori, Near Pratapur More, Panchayat-Jori Kala, P.O. - &
P.S.-Jori Kala, District - Chatra.
970. Amit Kumar Singh, son of Asheshwar Kumar Singh, resident
of 114, Chankayapuri, Mango, P.O.-Mango, P.S. - Mango,
District - East Singhbhum.
971. Jaya Kumari, daughter of Braj Kishor Singh, resident of W/O
- Rajnish Kishor Singh, Q. No. C.C 34, Champia Colony,
Sidhgoar, P.O.- Agrico, P.S. -Sidhgoar, District East
Singhbhum.
972. Harish Kumar Mahto, son of Ajambar Mahto, resident of H.No
18, Pitaidih, Chirudih, P.O., P.S. & District Ranchi.
973. Reema Mahato, daughter of Madhusudan Mahato, resident of
Sai Nagar Station Road, Bada Gamahria, P.O. Seraikela-
Kharsawan, P.S. Seraikela, District - Seraikela-Kharsawan.
974. Nishat Bajpai, son of Umesh Kumar Bajpai, resident of Q. No-
L2/11, Kulshi Road, P.O. - Sakchi, P.S. - Bistupur, District -
East Singhbhum.
975. Dhanu Hembrom, son of Soleshwar Hembrom, resident of
P.O.-Kathbhari, P.S.-Manjhari, District - Pashchimi Singhbhum.
976. Balram Kawat, son of Chitrasen Kawat, resident of Panchayat
- Buridih, P.S. - Kharswan, P.O. - Deoli, District - Seraikela-
Kharsawan.
977. Ashish Gupta, son of Pradeep Kumar Gupta, resident of
Private House, Muni Ashram, Main Road, Manoharpur, P.O. &
P.S.- Manoharpur, District - West Singhbhum.
978. Arjun Sharma, son of Kamlesh Sharma, resident of 41, Pandit
Hata, Ward 09, near Shiv Mandir, P.S. & P.O.-Chakradharpur,
District-Pashchimi Singhbhum.
979. Shankar Majhi, son of Sohrai Majhi, resident of Panchayat-
Dumra, P.O. & P.S.-Kandra, Mahtabeda, District - Seraikela-
Kharsawan.
980. Avinash Kumar, son of Keshaw Chandra Verma, resident of
S/28/9, S-type, Near Housing Colony P.S.-Adityapur, P.O. -
Adityapur, District - Seraikela-Kharsawan.
981. Suraj Deogam, son of Moika Deogam, resident of P.O.-
Barkundia, P.S.-Muffasil, P.O.-Chaibasa, District - Pashchimi
50
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Singhbhum.
982. Gautam Pal, son of Ram Binay Pal, resident of P.O.-Kabra
Khurd, P.S.-Haidarnagar, District - Palamu.
983. Jaya Ashraf, son of Md Nasim Uddin, resident of Vill Rewat
Kala, P.O. Matlong, P.S. Manika, District - Latehar.
984. Sandeep Kumar Mehta, son of Taleshwar Prasad Mehta,
resident of VTC - Darha, P.O. & P.S.- Ichak, District -
Hazaribagh.
985. Arjun Verma, son of Bhudeo Verma, resident of P.O.
Pahariya, Gram Ratura, Panchayat Pahariya, P.S. & District -
Deoghar.
986. Bhavesh Das, son of Sudhir Das, resident of Pathraul, P.O. &
P.S. - Pathrol, District - Deoghar.
987. Prakash Das, son of Gardi Das, resident of Ward No-18,
Chittlodhiya, P.O., P.S. & District - Deoghar.
988. Vinay Kumar Choudhary, son of Ramkishor Choudhary,
resident of Vill- Kajra, P.O. - Bagjora, P.S. Madhupur, District -
Deoghar.
989. Amit Raj, son of Binod Kumar Prasad, resident of Vill-
Lakhoriya, P.O.-Lakhoriya, P.S.-Sarwan, District - Deoghar.
990. Dashrath Ray, son of Pradhan Prasad Ray, resident of
Bhurkunda, Lakhoriya, Sarwan, P.O. - Sarwan, P.S.-Deoghar,
District - Deoghar.
991. Bambam Kumar, son of Ashok Kumar Mandal, resident of Vill-
Tilona, P.O.-Sahara, P.S. - Taljhari, District-Dumka.
992. Sarafat Hussain, son of Mubarak Hussain, resident of Vill.-
Ghaghi, P.O.-Jasidih, P.S.-Jasidih, District-Deoghar.
993. Md. Sadakat Hussain, son of Md. Mubarak Hussain, resident
of Ghaghi, Jasidih, Tobha Ghat, P.O., P.S. & District-Deoghar.
994. Md. Afroj Ansari, son of Md. Samsuddin Ansari, resident of
Vill-Tabhaghat, P.O. - Jasidih, P.S. - Jasidih, District - Deoghar.
995. Swarup Kumar Chandra, son of Diwakar Chandra, resident of
Vill- Rampur, P.O. & P.S. - Siktiya, District Dumka.
996. Sitaram Rana, son of Sahadeo Rana, resident of H. No- 09,
Ward No-07, Kanki, Masanjor, P.O. & P.S.-Jamtara, District -
Deoghar.
997. Abhishek Niraj, son of Jaykant Kumar Ray, resident of Vill.-
Pathariya, P.O. & P.S.-Punasi, District-Deoghar.
998. Pradip Kumar Yadav, son of Yogendra Yadav, resident of Vill-
Jamro, P.O.-Jhalar, P.S. - Mohanpur, District - Deoghar.
999. Dheeraj Kumar Ray, son of Himanshu Prasad Ray, resident of
Vill.-Khawashdih, P.O.-Ghorlash, Rohan, P.S.-Jasidih, VTC-
Khawasdih, District-Deoghar.
1000. Ajay Kumar Singh, son of Bipin Singh, resident of Mahatowa,
Jarkahi, Ojhadih, P.O. - Ojhadih, P.S. -Deoghar, District -
Deoghar.
1001. Sanjay Kumar Rajwar, son of Harendra Rajwar, resident of
Galgaltand P.O., P.S. & District - Bokaro.
1002. Amit Kumar Gope, son of Gaur Chandra Gope, resident of
111-upper tola Bansgari, P.O- Galgaltand, P.S-Chandankiyari,
District - Bokaro.
1003. Kuber Hazra, son of Abani Bhushan Hazra, resident of 76
51
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Chitahitand, P.O Alkusha, P.S.-Chasmu & District-Bokaro.
1004. Mitan Kumar Choubey, son of Balaram Choubey, resident of
P.O - Alkusha, P.S - Chasmu, & District -Bokaro.
1005. Ankit Kumar, son of Surendra Ram, resident of Sangbariya,
P.O., P.S. & District - Garhwa.
1006. Md. Qamruzaman Ansari, son of Md. Ibrar Ansari, resident of
New Azad Nagar, Bhuli, P.O., P.S. & District - Dhanbad.
1007. Dhanoj Kumar Rajwar, son of Manu Rajwar, resident of Vill -
Matari, Nichitpur, P.O., P.S. & District - Bokaro.
1008. Sumit Kumar Prajapati, son of Ghanshyam Prajapati,
residence of 265/A, pandra road, Near Hat Bazar, P.O., P.S. &
District - Seraikela Kharsawan.
1009. Vikash Kumar, son of Nandlal Modi, residence of Gawan, P.O.,
P.S. & District - Giridih.
1010. Amlesh Kumar Ravi, son of Shayamlal Ram, resident of Vill-
Potma, P.O., P.S. & District - Giridih.
1011. Goutam Kumar Das, Son of Kailash Das, resident of Vill-
Hussainabad, P.O. - Deoghar, P.S. - Deoghar, District -
Deoghar.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi through
its Chairman
4. The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission,
Ranchi
5. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission, Ranchi
6. The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel,
Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of
Jharkhand, Ranchi
.... ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
---
For the Petitioners : Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Aprajita Bhardwaj, Advocate
Mr. Akash Ajit Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Advocate
Ms. Satakchhi Priya Verma, Advocate
Mr. Abhishek Abhi, Advocate
For the State-Respondent : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate General
Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C. to A.G.
For the Intervenors : Mr. Gopal Shankarnarayan Sr. Advocate
Ms. V. Mohana, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Amritansh Vats, Advocate
Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate
52
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate
Ms. Neha Bhardwaj, Advocate
Mr. Rishav Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate
Mr. Bhawesh Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
Mr. Ram Subhag Singh, Advocate
Mr. Raj Vardhan, Advocate
Ms. Archana Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent-JSSC : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate
Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate
---
Reserved on 03.11.2025 Pronounced on : 03. 12.2025
Per : Rajesh Shankar, J. :
W.P. (PIL) No. 5717 of 2024 has been preferred for the following reliefs: -
(i) for conducting proper investigation/enquiry through a court monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) or through an independent central agency into the serious incident of paper leak having repeatedly taken place in the examination of Jharkhand General Graduate Level Combined Competitive Examination i.e. JGGLCCE-2023 (Regular) (hereinafter to be referred as "the said examination") held on 21/22.09.2024 conducted by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission (JSSC) for recruitment of 2021 persons on various posts which has resulted in great turmoil and resentment amongst about more than 3 lakh candidates who have appeared in the said examination but have got prejudiced due to paper leak.
(ii) for issuance of direction upon the respondents not to publish the final result of the said examination as 53 2025:JHHC:36194-DB well as not to issue offers of appointment unless and until the investigation/enquiry into the matter of paper leak is completed.
(iii) for commanding upon the respondents to frame and implement a full proof mechanism so as to ensure fairness in the competitive examinations in the State.
2. W.P.(S) No. 1476 of 2025 has been preferred for the following reliefs: -
(i) for quashing the Advertisement Nos. 10/2023 & 11/2023 floated by the JSSC to conduct Jharkhand General Graduate Level Combined Competitive Examination for the reason that the integrity of the said examination has been compromised as the questions related to the said examination were leaked much before the commencement of the said examination.
(ii) for quashing the Notification No. 28, dated 04.12.2024 issued by the JSSC whereby the roll numbers of the successful candidates have been published and they have been called to appear for documents verification.
(iii) for issuance of an appropriate direction to get the entire recruitment process investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.) which has been initiated pursuant to the publication of Advertisement 54 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Nos. 10/2023 & 11/2023 floated by the JSSC.
3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024 is being taken as a lead case to decide the present batch of writ petitions.
Submissions advanced by Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners
4. Learned senior counsel contends that the petitioners of this Public Interest Litigation are teachers attached with different coaching institutes of Ranchi having sufficient source of income. They are quite concerned with the well-being of a large number of young students along with their parents who are highly disappointed due to repeated incidents of paper leak having taken place in the State competitive examinations. The petitioners have the concern that most of the students belong to marginalized and poor families and they cannot stand at par with the privileged ones who are playing with the system to fetch government jobs by any means leaving no hope for them.
5. The petitioners have no vested private interest and they are taking up this matter just in public interest as a large number of aspirants/candidates have appeared in the said examination and most of them come from poor/marginalized families having difficulties and financial constraints in approaching this Hon'ble Court by way of filing individual writ petitions.
6. The JSSC floated an advertisement being Advertisement No. 10/2023 pertaining to JGGLCCE-2023 (Regular) inviting on-line applications for the posts of Assistant Section Officer, Junior Secretariat Assistant, Labour Enforcement Officer, Planning 55 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Assistant, Block Welfare Officer, Block Supply Officer, Circle Inspector-cum-Kanungo in which approximately 6,40,000 candidates applied.
7. The JSSC also floated another advertisement being Advertisement No. 11 of 2023 pertaining to JGGLCCE-2023 (Backlog) inviting on-line applications against the sanctioned vacancies for the post of Junior Secretariat Assistant (reserved category). It was mentioned in the said advertisement that for both the aforesaid advertisements, only one examination would be conducted i.e., 'Jharkhand General Graduate Level Combined Competitive Examination-2023 (regular & backlog).'
8. Initially, the JSSC fixed the date for conducting the said examination on 28.01.2024 and 04.02.2024, however the said examination was cancelled due to paper leak. The JSSC again notified the dates for the said examination to be conducted on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 and on the said dates, the Mobile Internet, Mobile Data and Mobile Wi-Fi services of all mobile service providers were shut down in the entire State of Jharkhand vide order dated 20.09.2024 issued under the signature of the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management, Government of Jharkhand (the respondent no. 6).
9. On 22.09.2024, prior to the commencement of examination in the first shift, various candidates who were also appearing at the said competitive examination, came across such instances which clearly suggested that a good number of co- candidates were already having access to the questions going to 56 2025:JHHC:36194-DB be asked in the examination and were also in possession of the answers to those questions.
10. Several candidates had reported the instances of paper leak to the JSSC as well as the police authorities, some of which are as follows: -
(i) At Baliyapur examination centre, one Ramchandra mandal had seen a person, possibly a candidate, who was talking to someone else on his mobile phone and was noting down the answers on a piece of paper. He took picture of the paper by his mobile phone and after examination, he found that the same were the answers of the questions asked in the examination centre.
(ii) At Kumar B. Ed College, Dhanbad, one Prem Lal Thakur had seen a co-candidate noting down something on his notebook while talking to someone on his mobile phone and when he approached the co-
candidate, he tore the paper. Prem Lal Thakur's friend, who was riding the bike, video graphed the incident and they kept the torn paper. After examination they re-arranged the torn paper and found that the same were answers to the questions asked in the examination paper.
(iii) At Makhmandro Centre, Ratu, Ranchi, one Ashish Kumar had seen a co-candidate talking to someone on mobile phone and noting down something on a 57 2025:JHHC:36194-DB piece of paper. Ashish had also noted down the said answers on a newspaper and after the examination he found that the same were answers of the questions asked in the examination.
(iv) One Upendra Raut, who was going to his examination centre, had noticed that a co-candidate was engaged in a conversation with someone and was noting down answers on a note pad. He copied what was being written by the said co-candidate in a separate paper and took a picture of the paper by his mobile phone. After the examination, he found that the same were the answers of the question paper of the examination.
(v) One student of Exam Fighter Coaching Centre had informed that five students had gone to Bihar for memorizing the question paper.
(vi) One Anil Kumar was travelling in a train from Patna to Dhanbad. He found that 2 co-passengers were discussing some questions which he noted down and forwarded to his alternate Whatsapp number. After examination, he found that the same were similar to the questions asked in the examination.
(vii) One Santosh Mastana had received a phone call from his student Deepika who had dictated some questions to him which were subsequently asked in the examination.
58
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
(viii) On 21.09.2024, one Gopi Krishna Yadav had received two images from Alok Krishna on Telegram App containing some answers. After examination, he found that the answers shared to him were the answers of the questions asked in the examination.
11. All the aforesaid incidents are supported by photographs and videos which clearly indicate that the questions in relation to the said examination were leaked much prior to the commencement of the examination and the same were known to few candidates as a result of which they got unfair advantage over the other candidates.
12. The incidents of paper leak were well known to some candidates before the commencement of the said examination, however they could not inform the same to the state authorities due to shut down of internet service in the entire State of Jharkhand.
13. Apart from the paper leak, there had also been widespread cheating in the said examination committed by few candidates engaging someone else to appear in the examination on their behalf with a view to score better marks. One of such incidents occurred in Ramgarh district.
14. There have been incidents of paper leak in other competitive examinations conducted in the recent past which clearly suggest that the State of Jharkhand has been the epicenter of paper leak and thus the same needs intervention of this Hon'ble Court so as to avoid such incidents and to ensure sanctity and 59 2025:JHHC:36194-DB purity of the competitive examinations.
15. In addition to the direct incidents of paper leakage at the examination centers, it also came to light during conversation with the large number of students/candidates who had gathered outside the JSSC office on 26.09.2024 to protest and raise voice against compromised integrity of the said examination, that the occurrence of question papers and answers leak at various locations had taken place two to three days prior to holding the examination, some of which had happened in a hotel at Asansol (West Bengal) and in a marriage hall at Niyamatpur (West Bengal). Similar instances of assembling few candidates for the purpose of sharing the leaked questions and their answers reportedly took place at Muzaffarpur (Bihar), Ranchi, Mandu, Delhi and Kathmandu (Nepal) where selected groups of candidates were prepped for the said examination.
16. Numerous questions in the said examination were found copied from the SSC Combined Graduate Level Examinations held in 2019 and 2022. The said information was given to few candidates which shows that the questions were deliberately leaked to give advantage to specific candidates in order to allow them to prepare in advance for securing higher marks than other candidates.
17. A group of students represented all the responsible authorities including His Excellency, The Governor of Jharkhand who, in turn, issued written direction to the state government and JSSC for taking needful actions but no final decision was taken by 60 2025:JHHC:36194-DB the JSSC, rather its authorities were in utter haste to publish the result and offer appointments to all 2021 candidates who were in advantageous position than the common candidates.
18. Despite these serious allegations and evidences provided by several students, including photographs and videos, no First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by JSSC with regard to paper leak which indicates that the JSSC is deliberately attempting to suppress the matter and to proceed announcing the results so as to facilitate the appointment of pre-selected candidates.
19. One of the teachers namely Rajesh Prasad had lodged an online complaint under the provision of Section 173(1) of the 'Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023' on 29.09.2024, however, under undue influence of some unknown "high-ups", the police did not permit him to put his signature on the said complaint as required to be done under Section 173 (1)(ii) of the BNSS, 2023. Thus, the police did not register his FIR and the officials were reluctant to proceed in the matter so as to safeguard the paper leakers/conspirators.
20. Moreover, shutdown of internet services during the said examination was intended to prevent similar reports reaching the JSSC before commencement of the examination ensuring that paper leak could be facilitated through mobile phones without interruption and people would remain under impression that everything was going on in a fair and transparent manner.
21. There was a well-coordinated conspiracy involving JSSC officials, staff, certain agencies, and high-ranking government 61 2025:JHHC:36194-DB officials in facilitating question paper leak and various unfair means of cheating to the favoured individuals helping them to score higher marks in the said competitive examination.
22. The ultimate objective of this conspiracy is to facilitate appointments of those favoured individuals on the government positions by providing them leaked examination materials, thereby undermining fairness and integrity of the examination process. These acts do not only violate the basic principle of fairness in a competitive examination but also breach the trust and expectation of several aspiring candidates and the public at large.
23. The conduct of the JSSC has been questionable. Most of the examinations held by it have been in controversy as on several occasions, either the questions papers have been leaked or the merit lists have not been published or the entire examination conducted by it has been cancelled due to irregularity. Moreover, the role of JSSC has always been under scanner for repeatedly committing irregularities in conducting competitive examinations ultimately hampering the career of the appearing candidates.
24. A large number of candidates appearing in the competitive examinations come from poor/marginalized backgrounds. They can only express pain before their teachers like the petitioners who provide them courage, guidance and training to prepare for the competitive examinations, but in the present situation, when thousands of students/candidates of the State of Jharkhand are puzzled and perturbed, the petitioners have been advised to espouse their cause who want fair, transparent and 62 2025:JHHC:36194-DB corruption/manipulation free conduct of competitive examinations.
25. The repeated malpractices and irregularities in the competitive examinations conducted by the JSSC have led to a significant loss of faith among the aspiring candidates and the general public. The state machinery which is entrusted with the solemn duty of conducting fair and transparent examinations, has miserably failed in it resulting in distrust among the aspirants.
26. The examination process has prima facie been marred by blatant illegalities. These malpractices violate the right of the candidates to avail fair opportunities in view of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Moreover, these inflict irreparable damage to the candidates' future prospects as repeated cancellations and re- conduct of examinations create uncertainty and stress.
27. Many candidates appeared in the said examination across the country travelling great distances to participate. However, due to the irregularities, their efforts rendered futile causing severe psychological and financial harm to them. This is evidenced by the fact that out of 3.19 lakh candidates scheduled to appear on the first day of the examination held on 21.09.2024, only 35-40% appeared. Moreover, on the second day i.e., 22.09.2024, the attendance also fell to a mere 42.49%. This decline in participation of candidates is a clear indicator of erosion of faith in the examination process managed by the JSSC.
28. The mismanagement in the examination process denies a fair chance to the candidates to compete and succeed on merit. Repeated failure of the JSSC in conducting fair examinations has 63 2025:JHHC:36194-DB caused irreparable harm to the aspirations of thousands of students who have dedicated many years in preparing for competitive exams and they only seek fairness and transparency.
29. The JSSC has consistently failed to publish final merit lists after conducting various competitive examinations in which it has only disclosed the results undermining the fundamental principles of transparency and accountability, both being essential in public employment. Moreover, every public functionary must act fairly, objectively and with maximum transparency in order to meet the spirit of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India which requires the selection process in public employment to be flawless, open and objective, thereby providing equal opportunity to all aspiring candidates. However, non-publication of the merit lists with respect to various competitive examinations conducted by the JSSC suggests its malafide intent, arbitrary conduct and thus, violates candidates' right to information. Such action breaches the principle of equality enshrined in the Constitution rendering entire selection process invalid. Argument on behalf of the State
30. Learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State makes the following argument: -
31. The nature and purpose of filing the present PIL is malicious in order to gain popularity and to stall the appointment process of successful candidates.
32. In compliance of the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by this Court, FIRs being CID Ranchi P.S. Case Nos. 01/2025 and 64 2025:JHHC:36194-DB 02/2025 dated 01.01.2025 and 03.01.2025 for the offences under Sections 316(2)/318(2)/318(4)/61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 12(2)/12(3) of the Jharkhand Competitive Examinations (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023 respectively were registered and in view of seriousness of the matter, an officer of the rank of Superintendent of Police was appointed as the investigating officer in the said cases.
33. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was also constituted vide Memo No. 776/NGO dated 20.08.2025 comprising of Shri Anoop Birtharay, Inspector General of Police (STF), Jharkhand Jaguar, Ranchi as chairperson and Shri Y.S. Ramesh, DIG, S.C.R.B. Jharkhand, Ranchi and Shri Chandan Kumar Jha, DIG, CID as members.
34. The SIT inquired into all the allegations in detail relating to incident of question paper leak of JGGLCCE- 2023 as levelled in the complaint of the petitioners including the forensic inquiry of digital devices and examination of the material witness, however no relevant material has been found till date on which presumption of question paper leak in the said examination can be made.
35. During the course of investigation, four places of alleged occurrences have been identified which are as follows:-
(a) Bethany Convent, High School, Makhmandro, Ratu, Ranchi.
(b) Kumar B.Ed. College, P.S. Rajganj, Dhanbad.
(c) U.P.G. High School Baliapur, Dangipara Nichetola, Dhanbad.
(d) 200 yards South of BGS/Basudev Gandhi High School 65 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Loyabad, P.S. Loyabad, District- Dhanbad.
36. According to learned Advocate General, the instant writ petition (PIL) is vague on fact merely based on certain isolated incidents of candidates overhearing/over-seeing other candidates writing answers, however the same have not been substantiated by any cogent evidence. A bare reading of these incidents and similar nature of allegations explained in the petition makes it clear that those are concocted. It is the own case of the petitioners that they do not know the persons alleged to be involved in the incident of paper leak. No allegation against any public/ government servant has been levelled. The modus operandi of collecting their evidences is same and identical while the places of occurrences are only different. Moreover, the allegation of paper leak is confined to the examination held on 22.09.2024 which only pertains to paper-III, i.e., the General Studies.
37. All the alleged witnesses failed to take pictures of the persons who were allegedly scribbling in papers or discussing the answers which clearly indicate malafide on the part of the petitioners.
38. From the screenshots of seized mobile phones of four witnesses namely Premlal Thakur, Anil Kumar, Upendra Raut and Ramchandra Mandal, total 187 answers were found, out of which only 123 answers were different as several anwers were common in the screenshots of the mobile phones of those witnesses. Only 66 answers were found matching with JSSC-CGL answers of the said examination.
66
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
39. Out of 20 questions asked in the reasoning paper of the said examination held on 21.09.2024, 16 questions were repeated from the SSC-CGL examination of 2016 and 4 questions were repeated from UPSC-Civil Services Aptitude Test (CSAT), 2020 & 2021. Similarly, out of 20 questions asked in the Mathematics paper, 10 questions were repeated from SCC-CGL, 2018 and remaining questions were repeated from SSC-CGL 2017, 2018 & UPSC-CSAT, 2022.
40. Moreover, out of 20 questions asked in the Reasoning paper of the examination held on 22.09.2024, 16 questions were repeated from the SSC-CGL examination, 2018 and 4 questions were repeated from UPSC-CSAT, 2015. Similarly, out of 20 questions asked in Mathematics paper of the examination held on 22.09.2024, 16 questions were repeated from SCC-CGL, 2021. This implies that considerable number of questions were repeated from the recently held examinations of the SCC-CGL and UPSC-CSAT.
41. Pursuant to the public notice issued by the CID, lists of proofs containing 54 proofs were produced by the students which were inquired by the CID wherein it was found that 18 proofs were false, 14 were irrelevant and the rest are under verification by the CID.
42. The statement of Santosh Kumar @ Mastana was again taken in which he stated that on 21.09.2024, between 11:00 to 12:00 PM, he received a WhatsApp call from one Deepika, who was a student of his online Mathematics class and she dictated him around 29 answers which were subsequently sent by him to the 67 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Deputy Superintendent of Police namely, Vikash Srivastava. After analysis, it was found that 11 answers out of those 29 were similar to the answers which appeared in the JSSCCGL exam held on 22.09.2024. The investigation revealed that out of 11 answers shared by Mastana, 9 were the answers of questions asked in previous SSC- CGL examinations and 2 were repeated from various competitive examinations.
43. The statement given by Santosh Mastana was inquired from the student- Deepika by a female Inspector of Police. Deepika stated that she was a student of Santosh Mastana. She was working as clerk in State Bank of India and was also preparing for different competitive examinations. She further stated that she had received the question paper of General Studies of the said examination held on 21.09.2024 in her WhatsApp group at about 3:00 p.m. She started solving the same with her friend Manish and they found that several questions were repeated from the previous years' questions of SSC-CGL. Manish also told her to solve the questions of SSC-CGL of the years 2018 and 2021. She also stated that she made WhatsApp call to Santosh Mastana but he did not pick up the call. After some time, Santosh Mastana made WhatsApp call to her while she was sovling the previous years' questions of SSC-CGL of the years 2018 and 2021. During discussion with him about previous years' questions, she hurriedly dictated the answers of those questions to Santosh Mastana which he thought that the question paper of the said examination was leaked and she knew about it. She further stated that in fact the 68 2025:JHHC:36194-DB question paper of the said examination was not leaked, rather she solved and dicussed with Santosh Mastana the previous years' questions of SSC-CGL which were asked in the examination held on 22.09.2024.
44. It has also been alleged by the petitioners that there was incident of question paper leak on 22.09.2024 and due to the said paper leak, there was a huge difference in number of successful candidates as against the candidates who had appeared in the examination on 21.09.2024 as out of total candidates who had appeared on the said date, only 82 successful candidates were called for document verification whereas 2149 successful candidates were called for document verification out of those who had appeared in the examination held on 22.09.2024. In fact, the data analysis reveals that the candidates who had opted 'Hindi' as regional language, had appeared in the examination held on 21.09.2024, whereas on 22.09.2024, the candidates who had opted other regional languages namely, 'Khortha', 'Nagpuri', 'Santhali', 'English', 'Ho' etc., had appeared and maximum and minimum cut-off marks of these papers were significantly higher than that of 'Hindi' paper.
45. The number of selected candidates from 'Khortha' and 'Nagpuri' languages alone are 1106 and 589 respectively which is substantial out of the total 2231 selected candidates called for document verification.
46. Further, date wise cut-off marks for General Studies papers reveals that minimum and maximum cut-off marks for 69 2025:JHHC:36194-DB examination of the said paper held on 21.09.2024 was more than the examination of the said paper held on 22.09.2024 i.e. the alleged date of question paper leak.
47. It is thus a clear case of malpractice committed by some fraudsters by convincing few candidates that question papers of the said examination were possessed by them and the answers to the questions would be provided to them if approached. Moreover, the places of occurrence regarding the act of malpractice have been identified and the candidates involved in the same have also been traced out. Therefore, segregation of candidates who allegedly went into the trap of scammers is quite possible. The allegation of paper leak is restricted only to 3 examination centers out of the 824 centers and only 25 candidates have been found qualified from these 3 centers.
48. In fact, the scammers had made only guess work of the questions asked in the previous competitive examinations as only 66 answers have matched out of the total 123 answers allegedly disclosed by them.
49. The coaching centers invariably allege paper leak in almost all the competitive examinations being conducted by the State/JPSC/JSSC with the evil design of getting those cancelled as holding of frequent examinations benefit them financially.
50. Had there been a case of paper leak in a particular examination center, there would have been be a spike of selected candidates from that center, however there is no information regarding any such spike of selected candidates from any 70 2025:JHHC:36194-DB particular center, rather the percentage of selected candidates from all the centers involved in the said examination are uniform and consistent.
51. The alleged occurrence of question paper leak in the said examination is not at all true, rather it is a co-incidence that the questions asked in the previously held Combined Graduate Level Examinations conducted by the SSC and JSSC have been repeated which are set by the JSSC as per its SOP regarding conducting of competitive examination. The said fact however does not give rise to the presumption that there has been leak of question papers prior to holding of the said examination. The Previous Year Question (PYQ) analysis of similar examinations conducted by the JSSC and other Examination Bodies including SSC is widely available and is a common methodology used in preparation of competitive examinations.
52. The police authorities under the supervision of SIT have conducted a detailed and impartial investigation in the instant matter and no material has surfaced to suggest any act of malpractice in the said examination.
Argument on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 (JSSC)
53. After cancellation the first phase of the said examination earlier held on 28.01.2024 and before commencement of the second phase scheduled to be held on 04.02.2024, JSSC decided to conduct re-examination to ensure complete fairness in the examination. Accordingly, another empaneled agency was outsourced to make arrangement for the said purpose. 71
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
54. JSSC requested the Deputy Commissioners of all districts of the State of Jharkhand to provide examination centers in order to conduct the said examination on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024. After getting sufficient numbers of examination centers in all the districts, JSSC decided to conduct the examination on the said scheduled dates. The candidates were accordingly informed vide notices dated 13.08.2024 and 04.09.2024 regarding conduct of the said examination scheduled to be held on 21.09.2024 & 22.09.2024. In order to ensure fair and transparent conduct of the examination, the JSSC, vide its letter dated 11.09.2024, requested the Director General of Police, Jharkhand to instruct its officials to conduct inspections in all the hotels, lodges, resorts, guest houses, etc., located in all the districts as well as to make suitable arrangement for fair conduct of the examination under the supervision of the Superintendents of Police of the concerned districts.
55. On the scheduled dates i.e. 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024, the JSSC conducted the examination in 823 examination centers under the supervision of district administration.
56. The State Government also issued order temporarily suspending the internet services to prevent malpractice and curb spread of rumours through social media during the examination period as well as to ensure the seamless examination process.
57. More than 3 lakh candidates appeared the said examination in course of which, not a single complaint regarding leakage of the question paper was received by the JSSC on both 72 2025:JHHC:36194-DB the dates i.e., on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 either through e-mail or any other mode after resumption of internet services.
58. After conducting the said examination, 'Khairiyat Reports' about peaceful conduct of the examination were also sent to the JSSC by the Static Magistrates, Examination Observers and Center Superintendents of the respective districts.
59. Moreover, no news regarding leakage of question papers at any examination center in course of the examinations held on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 was published in any newspaper.
60. Pursuant to the examination, the JSSC did not receive any complaint either written or through e-mail from any candidate till 25.09.2024 regarding leakage of question paper during the examination process, however a complaint was submitted on 25.09.2024 by two persons namely Ram Chandra Mandal and Prem Lal Thakur before His Excellency, the Governor of Jharkhand about alleged leakage of question paper and repetition of questions which was forwarded to the JSSC on 26.09.2024 by the Governor's secretariat along with Pen Drive.
61. On 26.09.2024, Shri Prakash Kumar [the petitioner No.1 of W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024] and Shri Kunal Pratap Singh-both the proprietors of Coaching Institutes, also submitted complaints of Shri Ashish Kumar, Shri Prem Lal Thakur, Shri Binay Kumar and Shri Ram Chandra Mandal to the JSSC along with Pen Drive and C.D.
62. On receipt of the letter dated 25.09.2024 from the Governor's Secretariat, the Chairman, JSSC, vide office order 73 2025:JHHC:36194-DB No. 294 dated 27.09.2024, constituted three- members committee under the chairmanship of Member Secretary, JSSC to enquire into the allegation of question paper leak. The said committee, vide its letters dated 27.09.2024, 28.09.2024, 29.09.2024, 03.10.2024 and 05.10.2024, requested the complainants to provide the original mobile phones through which photographs were allegedly taken, videos and voices were recorded as well as to give affidavit(s) about correctness of the evidences submitted through Pen Drive, but those were never submitted before the said committee. The C.D. submitted by the complainants was examined by the said committee and was found empty.
63. The complainants including the petitioner no.1 of W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024 neither produced any affidavit nor submitted other relevant documents before the said enquiry committee despite its repeated direction. The said enquiry committee submitted its report to the Chairman, JSSC on 14.10.2024 in which the allegations of the complainants were not found correct.
64. Moreover, SIT has also been constituted by the State Government which is investigating the matter, however till date, no evidence regarding question paper leak of the said examination has been found.
65. Thus, the allegation regarding question paper leak is completely false. It may at best be a case of repetition of questions asked in the previously held competitive examinations. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory and other materials 74 2025:JHHC:36194-DB collected by the SIT in course of the investigation are also sufficient to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made by the petitioners.
Argument made by Mr. Gopal Shankaranarayanan, learned senior counsel for the intervenors (I.A No. 12854 of 2025)
66. Learned senior counsel submits that all the applicants of I.A No. 12854 of 2025 belong to the State of Jharkhand who have been successful in the said examination and have been called for document verification. No examination with respect to the Combined Graduate Level posts has been conducted by the JSSC for the last 8 years and for many of the applicants who have pinned their hopes on this avenue, this is their last opportunity to get the jobs. There is no systemic breach in the examination process. Even the breach highlighted by the petitioners is in doubt. The integrity of the examination process is also not affected.
67. Learned senior counsel further submits that the present PIL has been filed seeking two remedies; one, for the court monitored SIT regarding allegation of question paper leak, and another, for restraining the appointment process pursuant to declaration of the result of the said examination until the investigation into the matter is completed. Admittedly, the petitioners have neither sought cancellation of the said examination nor for conducting a fresh one.
68. The issue concerning proper investigation of the allegations made by the petitioners is to be adjudicated by this Court on the basis of various status reports and affidavits tendered 75 2025:JHHC:36194-DB by the State, however following are the admitted facts: -
(i) there is no leaked question paper that exists;
(ii) the alleged occurrence of question paper leak is concerned with only 1 paper out of 6 papers i.e., the 'General Studies' paper held on 22.09.2024.
(iii) as many as 57 answers out of the 123 answers do not feature in the General Studies Paper of the examination held on 22.9.2024;
(iv) the date and time logs are missing from all the devices of the witnesses who allegedly took pictures of the answers;
(v) none of 824 Examination Centres reported any allegation of malpractice;
(vi) all 1,24,255 candidates out of 3,04,694 who appeared in the examination and qualified in Paper-I, did so without any allegation levelled against the respective Paper-I conducted on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024;
(vii) the internet service was shut down during the examination held on two dates i.e. on 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 for preventing any digital sharing of leaked information.
69. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vanshika Yadav Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (2024) 9 SCC 743 has lays down the following litmus test to be followed before taking any decision with regard to cancellation of examination: - 76
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
(i) Whether the alleged breach was at a systemic level;
(ii) Whether it affected the integrity of the entire examination process; and
(iii) Whether it was possible to segregate the tainted from untainted candidates;
70. In the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the parameters for applying the above mentioned three tests considering inter alia the number of candidates, number of centres, the anomalies in marking, abnormalities in cut- off mark, possibility of isolating the wrongdoers and the availability of Internet to disseminate the purloined information.
71. Even in the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) paper leak was admitted, however the Hon'ble Supreme Court found that the same did not appear to be widespread or systemic and as such declined the request for re-examination. Their Lordships observed that if any candidate was found to be tainted, stringent action in accordance with law would be taken against him/her and allowed the CBI investigation to continue while directing the admissions to be made.
72. In the present case, there is no question paper leak and if at all, taken at its highest, there is only possibility that some questions might be known to a handful of individuals who had no internet access and as such there is no ground for re- examination. It is also submitted that the affidavit of the JSSC dated 16.10.2025 shows that there is no aberration or abnormality 77 2025:JHHC:36194-DB across dates, centres, districts or examinations.
73. A comparison of minimum and maximum cut-off marks with respect to the examination of General Studies Paper held on the 1st day (275/402) and 2nd day (236/399) would reveal that the cut-off marks for the said paper were almost similar in both the dates. Data with respect to selection of the candidates called for document verification from different test centres reveals that there is no trace of any abnormality. It is not the case of the petitioners that candidates from certain centres have only been selected.
Argument on behalf of Mrs. V. Mohana, Senior Advocate, for Intervenors (I.A. No. 12822 of 2025)
74. According to learned senior counsel, the present petition has been filed on the basis of vague and isolated incidents that some candidates had seen other candidates outside the examination centers writing answers in piece of papers. A bare reading of these incidents reveals that the allegations are similar in nature and not substantiated by the petitioners. It is their own case that they do not know the persons alleged to be involved in these incidents. No allegation against any public/ government servant has been made. All the alleged witnesses failed to take pictures of the persons who were allegedly scribbling in papers or discussing the answers which clearly proves lack of evidence to challenge the sanctity of the examination process.
75. It is clear from the FSL report that call logs were not available in the devices of the witnesses. In some devices, 78 2025:JHHC:36194-DB applications relating to 'fake GPS' were found.
76. Investigation has been going on for more than 10 months, however no concrete evidence of systemic and widespread leak of question paper has yet been found. No evidence to show leak of paper on social media or use of advanced technology has been found by the investigating agencies. Neither any examination centre has reported any untoward incident nor any question paper or answer sheet has been recovered from anywhere. No other complaint regarding question paper leak has been made except the complaints mentioned in the instant writ petition. No question paper with respect to the said examination has been found in any mobile phone or other devices.
77. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has time and again deprecated the practice of cancellation of examination unless systemic malpractice is found to compromise sanctity of the examination. In the present case, no systemic malpractice has been found till now. Only because some previous years' questions were repeated, the same cannot be a ground to set aside the entire selection process.
78. The examination process itself got delayed after the incident of question paper leak occurred in the said examination held on 28.01.2024 due to which appointments on the advertised posts have been lingering adversely affecting morale of the candidates as well as the public at large. Moreover, most of the applicants are in their 30s and 40s.
79. Since there is no trace of widespread malpractice and 79 2025:JHHC:36194-DB there appears to be only isolated incidents of fraud allegedly committed by some scamsters, this Court may allow the selection procedure to go ahead by appointing the selected candidates subject to final outcome of the investigation. If any of the selected candidates is found to be tainted, then he/she can be removed from the service.
Argument made by Mr. Indrajit Sinha on behalf of Intervenor in I.A No. 3789 of 2025
80. Learned counsel for the applicants of the said interlocutory application has controverted the contention of the petitioners that there was an unexplained delay in registration of the FIR pursuant to the complaints made on 29.09.2024 causing prejudice to the investigation. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the petitioners cannot invoke writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking registration of an FIR, rather the proper remedy available to them under law was to file a complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 173(4) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioners are attempting to attribute blame on the State authorities for belated registration of the FIR despite unexplained inaction on their part. Such conduct clearly reflects that the petitioners are not acting bona fide.
81. The petitioners have not approached this Hon'ble Court with clean hands. If the mobile phones of the petitioners contained evidence of the alleged question paper leak, there was no reason for them not to preserve the same so as to facilitate a fair investigation. On the contrary, the petitioners appear to have 80 2025:JHHC:36194-DB tampered with the evidence as it has come to notice from the counter affidavit dated 25.03.2025 filed by the CID that the mobile phones submitted by the petitioners did not contain the log files and GPS location.
82. It was further discovered that the mobile phone of one of the witnesses namely Premlal Thakur had an application installed for generating fake GPS locations. Had the petitioners been fair and co-operative in course of investigation, the log files would have been available in their mobile phones and a satisfactory explanation would have also been furnished regarding absence of GPS location in their mobile phones. It is pertinent to note that the absence of GPS location is not confined to a single device, but is common to all three mobile phones submitted by the petitioners which further casts serious doubt on their conduct and bona fide.
83. The petitioners of W.P.(S) No. 1476 of 2025 are unsuccessful candidates, who are not assailing the investigation at this stage but are, instead, pressing for scrapping of the entire examination. Such a plea is clearly self-serving as it would directly benefit them by affording another opportunity to reappear in the said examination.
Finding of the court
84. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.
81
2025:JHHC:36194-DB Preliminary argument qua maintainability of the present writ petition
85. Mrs. V. Mohana, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of some of the intervenors submits that the petitioners have no locus standi to file the present PIL as they are running coaching institutes and have not suffered any legal injury. Even a criminal complaint has been filed by one of the teachers of the coaching institute run by the petitioner no.1.
86. It is also contended that nature and purpose of the instant petition is malicious in order to gain popularity as well as filed with ulterior motive for personal gain. The present petition is a delay tactic tool, which has been used to stall the appointment process of successful candidates.
87. The law is well-settled that a third person having no bona-fide interest in a proceeding and who is not aggrieved, will have no locus to file Public Interest Litigation.
88. It is also submitted that filing of PIL by a third party has been deprecated by the Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State of W.B reported in (2004) 3 SCC 349 and the said principle has subsequently been followed in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan vs. State of Maharashtra & Others reported in (2013) 4 SCC 465, Neetu vs. State of Punjab & others reported in (2007) 10 SCC 614.
89. We do not wish to go into the said issue in view of the fact that few students have also preferred writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 1476 of 2025 claiming that integrity and sanctity of the 82 2025:JHHC:36194-DB said examination had been compromised as the questions related to the said examination were leaked much before commencement of the examination. Looking to the seriousness of the allegation levelled by the petitioners as well as the fact that larger public issue is involved in these cases, this court is taking up the matter so as to decide merit in the claims of the petitioners. Allegation qua paper leak Position of Law relating to Paper Leak
90. In the case of Union of India & Others vs. Rajesh P.U. Puthuvalnikathu and Another reported in (2003) 7 SCC 285, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under: -
"6. On a careful consideration of the contentions on either side in the light of the materials brought on record, including the relevant portions of the report said to have been submitted by the Special Committee constituted for the purpose of inquiring into the irregularities, if any, in the selection of candidates, filed on our directions -- which report itself seems to have been also produced for the perusal of the High Court -- there appears to be no scope for any legitimate grievance against the decision rendered by the High Court. There seems to be no serious grievance of any malpractices as such in the process of the written examination -- either by the candidates or by those who actually conducted them. If the Board itself decided to dictate the questions on a loudspeaker in English and Hindi and none of the participants had any grievance in understanding them or answering them, there is no justification to surmise at a later stage that the time lapse in dictating them in different languages 83 2025:JHHC:36194-DB left any room or scope for the candidates to discuss among them the possible answers. The posting of invigilators for every ten candidates would belie any such assumptions. Even that apart, the Special Committee constituted does not appear to have condemned that part of the selection process relating to conduct of the written examination itself, except noticing only certain infirmities only in the matter of evaluation of answer-sheets with reference to correct answers and allotment of marks to answers of some of the questions. In addition thereto, it appears that the Special Committee has extensively scrutinized and reviewed the situation by re-evaluating the answer- sheets of all the 134 successful as well as the 184 unsuccessful candidates and ultimately found that except 31 candidates found to have been declared successful though they were not really entitled to be so declared successful and selected for appointment there was no infirmity whatsoever in the selection of the other successful candidates than the 31 identified by the Special Committee. In the light of the above and in the absence of any specific or categorical finding supported by any concrete and relevant material that widespread infirmities of an all-pervasive nature, which could be really said to have undermined the very process itself in its entirety or as a whole and it was impossible to weed out the beneficiaries of one or the other irregularities, or illegalities, if any, there was hardly any justification in law to deny appointment to the other selected candidates whose selections were not found to be, in any manner, vitiated for any one or 84 2025:JHHC:36194-DB the other reasons. Applying a unilaterally rigid and arbitrary standard to cancel the entirety of the selections despite the firm and positive information that except 31 of such selected candidates, no infirmity could be found with reference to others, is nothing but total disregard of relevancies and allowing to be carried away by irrelevancies, giving a complete go-by to contextual considerations throwing to the winds the principle of proportionality in going farther than what was strictly and reasonably to meet the situation. In short, the competent authority completely misdirected itself in taking such an extreme and unreasonable decision of cancelling the entire selections, wholly unwarranted and unnecessary even on the factual situation found too, and totally in excess of the nature and gravity of what was at stake, thereby virtually rendering such decision to be irrational."
91. In the case of Joginder Pal and Others vs. State of Punjab & Others reported in (2014) 6 SCC 644 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows: -
"39. It becomes crystal clear that the concern of the Court was that for the misdeeds of some candidates, honest and meritorious candidates should not suffer. Therefore, endeavour should be made to segregate the tainted candidates from those who were without any stigma and had been selected because of their sheer merit and not on account of any illegal considerations. We would also like to reproduce some of the parts of the concurring judgment authored by Dalveer Bhandari, J. (as His Lordship then was) with the aforesaid message, eloquently and impeccably :(Inderpreet Singh 85 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Kahlon case [Inderpreet Singh Kahlon v. State of Punjab, (2006) 11 SCC 356] , SCC pp. 414-15, paras 118 & 124-25) "118. Undoubtedly, in the selection process, there have been manipulations and irregularities at the behest of R.S. Sidhu, the then Chairman, Punjab Public Service Commission. On a careful scrutiny of the facts and circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion, the High Court ought to have made a serious endeavour to segregate the tainted from the non-tainted candidates. Though the task was certainly difficult, but by no stretch of imagination, was it an impossible task.
***
124. The High Court has not considered the case in the proper perspective. The consequences of en masse cancellation would carry a big stigma particularly on cancellation of the selections which took place because of serious charges of corruption. The question arises whether for the misdeeds of some candidates, honest and good candidates should also suffer on en masse cancellation leading to termination of their services? Should those honest candidates be compelled to suffer without there being any fault on their part just because the respondents find it difficult to segregate the cases of tainted candidates from the other candidates? The task may be difficult 86 2025:JHHC:36194-DB for the respondents, but in my considered view, in the interest of all concerned and particularly in the interest of honest candidates, the State must undertake this task. The unscrupulous candidates should not be allowed to damage the entire system in such a manner where innocent people also suffer great ignominy and stigma.
125. This Court had an occasion to examine a similar controversy in [Onkar Lal Bajaj v. Union of India, (2003) 2 SCC 673] . In that case, there were serious allegations of political patronage in allotment of retail outlets of petroleum products (LPG distributorships and SKO-LDO dealerships). This Court laid down that how could a large number of candidates against whom there was not even insinuation be clubbed with a handful of those who were said to have been allotted dealerships/distributorships on account of political connection and patronage? This Court clearly stated that the two were clearly unequals. Equal treatment to unequals is nothing but inequality. This is the most important principle which has been laid down in this case by this Court. The Court further observed that to put both the categories, tainted and the rest, on a par is wholly unjustified, arbitrary and unconstitutional, being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In somewhat similar circumstances, in this 87 2025:JHHC:36194-DB case, the Government, instead of discharging its obligation, unjustly resorted to the cancellation of all the allotments en masse by treating unequals as equals without even prima facie examining their cases. Those officers whose services were affected because of en masse cancellation have not been given an opportunity to represent before the authorities concerned. In Onkar Lal Bajaj [Onkar Lal Bajaj v. Union of India, (2003) 2 SCC 673] there were 413 cases and the task was indeed difficult to segregate the cases of political connection and patronage with other cases. But, even then, this Court, while setting aside the order of the Government cancelling the allotment, appointed a committee of two retired Judges, one of this Court and another from the Delhi High Court, and they were requested to examine all 413 cases and decide the matter after getting the report from that committee appointed by the Court."
40. In view of the above, the issue of entire selection process having been vitiated would have arisen only if the findings of the Committee were that it was not possible to distinguish the cases of tainted from the non-tainted ones and there was a possibility that all of them would have got the benefit of wrongdoings of Mr Sidhu and his accomplices. Fortunately for these appellants, it is not so as they have been found innocent. The appellants get ensconced, earning a safe place, once they are removed from the category of 88 2025:JHHC:36194-DB nefarious persons. Though the tainted candidates have rightly received their comeuppance, but the innocent persons cannot be punished with them. Thus, it is difficult to accept the fallible conclusion of the High Court."
92. In the case of Gohil Vishvaraj Hanubhai & Others v. State of Gujarat & Others reported in (2017) 13 SCC 621 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under: -
"21. Purity of the examination process -- whether such examination process pertains to assessment of the academic accomplishment or suitability of candidates for employment under the State -- is an unquestionable requirement of the rationality of any examination process. Rationality is an indispensable aspect of public administration under our Constitution. [Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, (1979) 3 SCC 489] The authority of the State to take appropriate measures to maintain the purity of any examination process is unquestionable. It is too well settled a principle of law in light of the various earlier decisions of this Court that where there are allegations of the occurrence of large-scale malpractices in the course of the conduct of any examination process, the State or its instrumentalities are entitled to cancel the examination. [Nidhi Kaim v. State of M.P., (2016) 7 SCC 615 at para 23 : 7 SCEC 611 : (SCC pp. 639-40) "23. Even otherwise, the argument of the appellants is required to be rejected for the following reasons: under the scheme of our Constitution, the executive power of the State is coextensive with its legislative power. In the absence of any operative legislation, the executive 89 2025:JHHC:36194-DB power could certainly be exercised to protect the public interest. The right of each one of the appellants herein for admission to the medical colleges in the State of Madhya Pradesh is itself an emanation of the State's executive action. No doubt, even executive action of the State can create rights. Unless there is something either in the Constitution or law which prohibits the abrogation or abridgment of rights, it is permissible for the State to do so by executive action in accordance with some specified procedure of law. No doubt, that the overarching requirement of the Constitution is that every action of the State must be informed with reason and must be in public interest. Nothing has been brought to our notice which prohibits the impugned executive action. If it is established that the adoption of unfair means on large scale resulted in the contamination of the entrance examination (PMT) process of successive years, the State undoubtedly would have the power to take appropriate action to protect the public interest. I, therefore, reject the submission of the appellants."; In Union of India v. Anand Kumar Pandey, (1994) 5 SCC 663) 1235 large-scale cheating occurred in the Railway Recruitment Board Examination, specifically in two rooms of a centre. The Board took a decision to subject the successful candidates from that centre to a re- examination. This was set aside by the Central Administrative Tribunal on the ground that such a decision was taken in violation of the principles of natural justice. It was held that there cannot be any straitjacket formula for the application of the principles 90 2025:JHHC:36194-DB of natural justice. This Court did not find any fault with the decision to conduct a fresh examination.; In All India Railway Recruitment Board v. K. Shyam Kumar, (2010) 6 SCC 614 : (2010) 2 SCC (L&S) 293, large-
scale malpractices surfaced in the written test. The recruitment board ordered a retest, which was challenged in the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal held that a retest was valid. The High Court reversed invoking the Wednesbury's principles of reasonableness. This Court held that in the face of such large-scale allegations supported by reports of the Vigilance department and CBI, the High Court was wrong in reversing the tribunal's decision.] This Court has on numerous occasions approved the action of the State or its instrumentalities to cancel examinations whenever such action is believed to be necessary on the basis of some reasonable material to indicate that the examination process is vitiated. They are also not obliged to seek proof of each and every fact which vitiated the examination process. [Nidhi Kaim v. State of M.P., (2016) 7 SCC 615see paras 42.1 and 42.2 at p. 649 : 7 SCEC 611]
23. The next question is whether the impugned decision could be sustained judged in the light of the principles of Wednesbury [Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corpn., (1948) 1 KB 223 (CA)] unreasonableness". In the language of Lord Diplock, the principle is that "a decision which is so outrageous in its defiance of logic or of accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived 91 2025:JHHC:36194-DB at it". Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the prima facie proof indicating the possibility of occurrence of large-scale tampering with the examination process which led to the impugned action, it cannot be said that the impugned action of the respondent is "so outrageous in its defiance of logic" or "moral standards". Therefore, the second submission of the appellant is also required to be rejected."
93. In the case of Sachin Kumar & Others vs. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSB) & Others reported in (2021) 4 SCC 631 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under: -
"35. In deciding this batch of SLPs, we need not reinvent the wheel. Over the last five decades, several decisions of this Court have dealt with the fundamental issue of when the process of an examination can stand vitiated. Essentially, the answer to the issue turns upon whether the irregularities in the process have taken place at a systemic level so as to vitiate the sanctity of the process. There are cases which border upon or cross over into the domain of fraud as a result of which the credibility and legitimacy of the process is denuded. This constitutes one end of the spectrum where the authority conducting the examination or convening the selection process comes to the conclusion that as a result of supervening event or circumstances, the process has lost its legitimacy, leaving no option but to cancel it in its entirety. Where a decision along those lines is taken, it does not turn upon a fact-finding exercise into individual acts involving the use of 92 2025:JHHC:36194-DB malpractices or unfair means. Where a recourse to unfair means has taken place on a systemic scale, it may be difficult to segregate the tainted from the untainted participants in the process. Large-scale irregularities including those which have the effect of denying equal access to similarly circumstanced candidates are suggestive of a malaise which has eroded the credibility of the process. At the other end of the spectrum are cases where some of the participants in the process who appear at the examination or selection test are guilty of irregularities. In such a case, it may well be possible to segregate persons who are guilty of wrongdoing from others who have adhered to the rules and to exclude the former from the process. In such a case, those who are innocent of wrongdoing should not pay a price for those who are actually found to be involved in irregularities. By segregating the wrongdoers, the selection of the untainted candidates can be allowed to pass muster by taking the selection process to its logical conclusion. This is not a mere matter of administrative procedure but as a principle of service jurisprudence it finds embodiment in the constitutional duty by which public bodies have to act fairly and reasonably. A fair and reasonable process of selection to posts subject to the norm of equality of opportunity under Article 16(1) is a constitutional requirement. A fair and reasonable process is a fundamental requirement of Article 14 as well. Where the recruitment to public employment stands vitiated as a consequence of systemic fraud or irregularities, the entire process becomes illegitimate. 93
2025:JHHC:36194-DB On the other hand, where it is possible to segregate persons who have indulged in malpractices and to penalise them for their wrongdoing, it would be unfair to impose the burden of their wrongdoing on those who are free from taint. To treat the innocent and the wrongdoers equally by subjecting the former to the consequence of the cancellation of the entire process would be contrary to Article 14 because unequals would then be treated equally. The requirement that a public body must act in fair and reasonable terms animates the entire process of selection. The decisions of the recruiting body are hence subject to judicial control subject to the settled principle that the recruiting authority must have a measure of discretion to take decisions in accordance with law which are best suited to preserve the sanctity of the process. Now it is in the backdrop of these principles, that it becomes appropriate to advert to the precedents of this Court which hold the field".
94. In the aforesaid case, Their Lordships observed that the report of enquiry committee found deficiencies of a systemic nature which created serious doubts on the legitimacy of the entire recruitment process. Moreover, irregularities were not confined to acts of malpractice or unfair means on the part of a specific group of persons. Looking to the said fact, Their Lordships held that the decision of the government to cancel the entire process cannot be held to be irrational or arbitrary, applying the yardstick of fair procedure and proportionality to the decision making process.
95. In the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Baishakhi 94 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Bhattarcharya and Others reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 719, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held thus: -
"7. This Court in several cases has examined the question when the entire selection process should be struck down in case of irregularities. It will be apposite to refer to some of the decisions as the ratio and reasoning, in our opinion, is clear and does not suffer from contradictions. In Sachin Kumar v. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSSB), this Court observed that determining when the examination process is vitiated by irregularities requires an in-depth fact-finding inquiry. The answer lies in examining whether the irregularities were systemic enough to undermine the sanctity of the process. In some cases, the irregularities may border on or even constitute fraud, which severely damages the credibility and legitimacy of the process. In such cases, the only option is to cancel the result entirely. These are situations where it is difficult to separate the tainted from the untainted participants, and the irregularities are widespread, indicating a malaise or fraud that has corrupted the process. On the other hand, there are cases where only some participants have committed irregularities. In such cases, it may be possible to segregate the wrongdoers from those who adhered to the rules. The innocent should not suffer for the actions of the wrongdoers. By segregating the guilty, the selection process for the untainted candidates can proceed to its logical conclusion. This aligns with the principle of equality of opportunity under Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India, as well as the 95 2025:JHHC:36194-DB fundamental requirement of Article 14 of the Constitution, which mandates a fair, equitable, and reasonable process. Care must be taken to ensure that the innocent are not unfairly penalized alongside the wrongdoers by cancelling the entire process. To treat the innocent and the wrongdoers equally would violate Article 14 of the Constitution, as it would involve treating unequals equally. The innocent should not be punished for faults they did not commit. Finally, while the decision of the recruiting body is subject to judicial control, the body must retain a measure of discretion.
8. Sachin Kumar (supra) refers to an earlier decision of three Judges of this Court in Bihar School Examination Board v. Subhas Chandra Sinha where it was held that when the conduct of all examinees, or at least the vast majority, at a particular examination centre reveals the use of unfair means, it may not be necessary for the board to give individual opportunities of hearing to the candidates if the entire examination is being cancelled. This is not a case where anyone is charged with unfair means and would need to defend themselves. An examination vitiated by widespread unfair means falls into a separate category, so giving notice in individual cases is not required.
9. In Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P., Allahabad v. Ghanshyam Das Gupta, a Constitution Bench of this Court held that when there is a discovery of widespread unfair practices, such as the leakage of question papers or destruction of answer books, it may not be necessary to give each examinee an opportunity to be heard. While it may not be appropriate to 96 2025:JHHC:36194-DB completely whittle down the requirement of natural justice and fair play, a straitjacket formula cannot be applied when the examination was not properly conducted or when the majority of the examinees did not act as they should have. Therefore, insisting that the Board should hold a detailed inquiry into each individual case was considered incorrect. It was also observed that such an approach would delay the functioning of an autonomous body like the Board of High School and Intermediate Education.
10. In line with the above ratio, this Court in Anamica Mishra v. U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad, has held that the cancellation of the entire recruitment process was not justified as there was no systemic flaw in the entire recruitment process, and the issue was only with regard to calling the candidates for interview.
However, in Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal, M.P. v. Abhilash Shiksha Prasar Samiti, the entire examination was cancelled in view of the report of mass copying and leakage of the question paper. In Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal, M.P. (supra), the teachers did not object to the students entering the examination hall with books, indicating their complicity. It was held that the fact that some innocent students may have suffered in the given facts was inconsequential.
11. Similarly, in Union of India v. Rajesh P.U., Puthuvalnikathu, this Court examined a case where a Special Committee scrutinized the answer sheets of 134 successful and 184 unsuccessful candidates, identifying only 31 as involved in unfair practices. Based on this, 97 2025:JHHC:36194-DB the Court struck down the decision of the competent authority to cancel the entire recruitment process, deeming it extreme, unreasonable, and unnecessary given the circumstances. The Court applied the test of whether there were widespread, pervasive issues that had undermined the entire process and whether it was impossible to weed out those benefiting from the irregularities or illegalities.
12. In yet another decision in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon v. State of Punjab, this Court elucidated three principles which must be adhered to when cancelling appointments. First, there must be satisfaction regarding the sufficiency of the material collected so as to enable the State to conclude that the selection process was tainted. Second, to determine whether the illegalities committed go to the root of the matter and vitiate the entire selection process, such satisfaction should be based on a reasoned and thorough investigation conducted in a fair and transparent manner. Third, there must be sufficient material to support the conclusion that the majority of the appointments were part of the fraudulent purpose or that the system itself was corrupt. This three-pronged test, as outlined by Sinha J., is appropriate and should be adhered to.
13. The precursor to Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) involved raids that led to the recovery of large sums of cash from the house of the Chairman of the Punjab Public Service Commission. The allegations suggested that the Chairman - who served from 1996 to 2002 - had made several appointments between 1998 and 98 2025:JHHC:36194-DB 2001 for extraneous considerations, including monetary ones. The affected appellants before this Court, whose services were terminated, comprised four categories of officers selected through four recruitment examinations held between 1997 and 2001. Two FIRs came to be registered against the Chairman and other officers of the Public Service Commission. However, among the selectees, an FIR was filed only against one. In this factual background, Sinha J. drew a distinction between a proven case of mass cheating in a Board Exam and an unproven charge of corruption in the context of appointment of a civil servant. The en masse termination order setting aside several selections spread over 3-4 years was reversed. This was an unprecedented case of mass termination, with a walloping impact and consequences. Applying the threefold factual and legal test, en masse termination was set aside. In this context, it was observed that termination orders should only be issued in cases where it is found to be impossible or highly improbable to separate the tainted cases from the non-tainted ones.
14. In our considered view, the opinion expressed by Dalveer Bhandari J. in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) regarding the strict compliance with the principles of natural justice is not in line with the ratio of the earlier three Judge Bench decision in Bihar School Examination Board (supra). We would like to observe that the en masse termination in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) was based on the charge of corruption against the former Chairman, leading to the cancellation of the entire selection process and appointments, even though 99 2025:JHHC:36194-DB the charges against him had not yet been proven in a court of law.
15. Similarly, in another two Judge Bench decision in Joginder Pal v. State of Punjab32, this Court observed that every effort should be made to separate tainted from untainted candidates, and if it is found that segregating the tainted from untainted is possible, cancellation of the entire selection process would be incompatible with law.
16. In Chairman, All India Railways Recruitment Board v. K. Shyam Kumar, where the decision of the Railway Recruitment Board to cancel the examination and conduct retest on the ground of malpractices involving mass copying, leakage of question paper and impersonation was struck down by the High Court, this Court - reversing the judgment of the High Court - upheld the order of the Board to cancel the examination and conduct retest. Considering the material on record, the widespread irregularities and malpractice in the first written test, and the ultimate object of fair selection, this Court upheld the finding of the Board that the test was vitiated due to mass copying, impersonation, and question paper leakage, rather than misconduct by just a few candidates. In the said facts and circumstance, the decision of the Board to cancel the selection and reconduct the examination was held to be reasonable and well-balanced.
17. In State of Tamil Nadu v. A. Kalaimani, there were allegations of large-scale malpractices involving tampering with OMR sheets. After re-evaluation and further scrutiny, the Teachers Recruitment Board found 100 2025:JHHC:36194-DB that 196 candidates had been the beneficiaries of fraudulent alteration of marks. This Court referred to the observations in Gohil Vishvaraj Hanubhai v. State of Gujarat35 to hold that the authority of the State to maintain the purity of the examination process is unquestionable. Gohil Vishvaraj Hanubhai (supra) takes note of the settled dictum that the cancellation of the examination is necessary and required in cases where large-scale malpractices in the course of the conduct of any examination process are alleged. In this context, this Court in A. Kalaimani (supra) held that despite the inconvenience caused to the untainted candidates, a serious doubt regarding the magnitude of manipulation in the examination has to be given due weightage. It was held that the finding of the Board that there were chances of more people being involved in the manipulation of marks was a bona fide decision being taken by the Board to instil confidence in the public regarding the integrity of the selection process.
18. In Vanshika Yadav v. Union of India, this Court observed that a holistic view must be adopted by assessing the extent of unfair means used and whether it is possible to separate the tainted candidates from the untainted ones. The court must ensure that allegations of malpractice are substantiated and that the material on record, including investigative reports, supports this conclusion. There must be at least some evidence for the court to reach such a conclusion. However, the standard of evidence need not be unduly strict. Specifically, the material on record need not point to a single, definitive conclusion that malpractice 101 2025:JHHC:36194-DB occurred at a systemic level. Nevertheless, there must be a real possibility of systemic malaise, as reflected in the material before the court.
19. The following principles emerge from the aforesaid discussion:
• When an in-depth factual inquiry reveals systemic irregularities, such as malaise or fraud, that undermine the integrity of the entire selection process, the result should be cancelled in its entirety. However, if and when possible, segregation of tainted and untainted candidates should be done in consonance with fairness and equity.
• The decision to cancel the selection en masse must be based on the satisfaction derived from sufficient material collected through a fair and thorough investigation. It is not necessary for the material collected to conclusively prove malpractice beyond a reasonable doubt. The standard of evidence should be reasonable certainty of systemic malaise. The probability test is applicable.
• Despite the inconvenience caused to untainted candidates, when broad and deep manipulation in the selection process is proven, due weightage has to be given to maintaining the purity of the selection process. • Individual notice and hearing may not be necessary in all cases for practical reasons when the facts establish that the entire selection process is vitiated with illegalities at a large scale."
96. In the said case, Their Lordships cancelled the selection process looking to the fact of the said case that there were large scale manipulation and fraud coupled with the attempted cover-up 102 2025:JHHC:36194-DB which had dented the selection process beyond repair and partial redemption.
97. The case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) has been heavily relied upon by the intervenors as well as the State and it has been submitted that even in the said case, Their Lordships had found that there was incident of paper leak, however the examination process was not cancelled holding inter alia that there was no breach at systemic level and the segregation of the tainted candidates was possible. It is further submitted on behalf of the intervenors that in the present case, no incident of paper leak has been found and as such, the present writ petition may be dismissed applying the ratio of Vanshika Yadav (supra.).
98. On the other hand, learned senior counsels for the petitioners submit that in the case of Vanshika Yadav (supra.), the NEET examination was conducted on 05.05.2024, and the matter was promptly transferred to the CBI, which filed status reports on 10.07.2024, 17.07.2024, and 21.07.2024, each affirming that the investigation was progressing in a structured and time- bound manner. Moreover, within a span of just three months, the CBI succeeded in segregating the tainted candidates by completing the investigation and submitted comprehensive findings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, the investigation in the present case stands on the footing of inconsistency and delay. Despite the matter being under scrutiny of this Court for a period of more than ten months, there is neither conceptual clarity nor evidentiary coherence in the manner the investigation has proceeded. The 103 2025:JHHC:36194-DB investigation has oscillated between contradictory findings, frequently altered SITs and selective reliance on evidence that too all without achieving even a fraction of the progress as observed in the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.).
99. It is further submitted that the evidence on record including registered FIRS, seized devices, call-records and confessional statements along with the State's stand taken before different Forums would demonstrate a pervasive, organised network operating across multiple districts, rendering segregation of the tainted candidates impossible. The proportionality concerns which weighed with the Supreme Court in the NEET-UG examination (involving 23 lakh candidates) have no application to a State-level recruitment examination being comparatively of limited scale. Accordingly, the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) neither governs nor puts constrains on the adjudication of these petitions; on the contrary, it re-affirms that where a systemic breach exists and segregation of tainted candidates is impracticable, rather annulment of the examination is the only constitutionally permissible course.
100. We have perused the judgment rendered in the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.). In the said case, as per the report submitted by the CBI, the investigation was ongoing and till that time, it surfaced from the materials gathered during the investigation that about 155 students from the examination centres at Hazaribagh and Patna were the beneficiaries of fraud (around 30 in Patna and around 125 in Hazaribagh). No material 104 2025:JHHC:36194-DB was placed by the CBI before the Hon'ble Supreme Court to demonstrate that the question paper or the solved answers were circulated at random or en masse over social media.
101. In the said case, their Lordships have held that cancellation of an examination, which has been conducted either for the purposes of getting admission into professional and other courses or for the purpose of recruitment to a government post, is justified only in such situation where sanctity of the examination is found to be compromised at a systemic level. Courts may direct cancellation of an examination or may approve such cancellation made by the competent authority only if it is not possible to separate the tainted candidates from the untainted ones.
102. Their Lordships have further held that the purpose of testing whether the integrity of the examination has been compromised at a systemic level is to ensure that the cancellation of the examination which has already taken place and conducting a fresh examination is a proportionate response. This is also why the Courts are required to assess the extent of the use of unfair means and separately consider whether it is possible to separate the tainted and the untainted candidates.
103. It has also been held that in arriving at a conclusion as to whether an examination suffers from widespread issues, the Courts must ensure that the allegations of malpractice are substantiated and that the material on record including investigative reports point to that conclusion. There must be at least some evidence to allow the Court to reach that conclusion. To 105 2025:JHHC:36194-DB elaborate, it is not necessary for the material on record to point to one and only conclusion which is that the malpractice has taken place at a systemic level, however there must be a real possibility of systemic malaise as borne out from the material before the Court.
104. Their Lordships finally came to the conclusion that undoubtedly the question paper of NEET was leaked at certain centers and some students were indulged in malpractice, however there were no abnormalities in the results declared for the year 2024 concerning the centers in controversy when compared with the results of past two years. Hence, an analysis of the result did not lend support to the case of the petitioners of Vanshika Yadav (supra) who sought cancellation of the examination. The leak of the question paper did not appear to be widespread or systemic, rather the same was restricted to isolated incidents in some cities, which had been identified by the police or were also in the process of being identified by the CBI.
105. Their Lordships did not find a systemic leak or systemic malpractice of other forms. It was further observed that the CBI investigation had revealed the number of students who were the beneficiaries of the malpractice or fraud at the examination centers of Hazaribagh and Patna and it was possible to separate them from the honest students.
106. The case of Tanvi Sarwal (Supra.) which has been relied upon by the petitioners in the present case, was distinguished by the Hon'ble Supreme Court while adjudicating the 106 2025:JHHC:36194-DB case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) by observing as under:-
"91. Tanvi Sarwal v. CBSE, (2015) 6 SCC 573 is distinguishable from the case before us on many counts. First and foremost, the unscrupulous candidates in that case used sophisticated technology including vests fitted with micro SIMs to cheat. No such technology has come to light at present, in this case. Second, the question paper was found to have been shared on WhatsApp before the date of the exam. Once shared through social media, it is exceedingly difficult to trace the journey of a post or message or document. Here, the record at present does not indicate that the question paper was shared on social media before the date of the exam. Third, in Tanvi Sarwal case, the assistance of a gang with a nationwide network was stated to have been taken and calls were made by the accused to persons living in numerous States in the country. No such nationwide ring is seen at present in this case. Fourth, the Court found that it was not possible to separate the beneficiaries of the leak from the honest candidates. Here, the Court has concluded that the fraudulent candidates may be identified by the investigating agency. For these reasons, the decision in [Tanvi Sarwal v. CBSE, (2015) 6 SCC 573] does not support the case of the petitioners. The allegations in this case are not substantiated by the material on record."
107. Further, the case of Sachin Kumar (Supra.) was also distinguished by the Hon'ble Supreme Court from facts of the case of Vanshika Yadav (Supra.) by observing as under:-
"95. The question in [Sachin Kumar v. Dsssb, (2021) 4 107 2025:JHHC:36194-DB SCC 631] was whether the decision to cancel the recruitment process was justified. The Court held that the credibility of the entire exam stood vitiated by systemic irregularities, as highlighted by the findings of the first committee appointed by the Government. It found that the allegations made regarding the sanctity of the exam had been substantiated by the investigation which followed. It therefore upheld the decision of the Deputy Chief Minister to cancel the exam and set aside the judgment [Dsssb v. Puneet Kumar, (2020) 1 HCC (Del) 500] of the High Court.
96. That case, too, is distinct from the one before us. In Sachin Kumar v. Dsssb, (2021) 4 SCC 631], the material before the Court was sufficient to lead to the conclusion that there was mass malpractice, which attacked the integrity of the exam at a systemic level. This is indicated by the fact that a large number of candidates in the zone of selection were from the same concentrated geographical region and that candidates from the same family were sitting in consecutive spots during the exam. There was also impersonation and the coordinated dilution of security protocols in that case. There was an abundance of material before the Court in that case. The same cannot be said to be true in the instant case. Hence, the ruling in that case cannot influence the outcome in this case. Moreover, in cases such as these, courts must take a holistic view of the facts before them and reach an independent conclusion. Different courses of action are appropriate in different circumstances."
108. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vanshika 108 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Yadav (Supra.) has laid down three-fold test to be followed in a case relating to paper leak: -
(i) Whether the breach occurred at a systemic level?
(ii) Whether such breach compromised the integrity of the entire examination process?
(iii) Whether it is possible to segregate tainted from untainted candidates?
109. Learned Advocate General has put reliance on the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of Patna High Court in the case of Anand Legal Aid Forum Trust Vs. Bihar Public Service Commission & Others (with other analogous cases) reported in 2025 Supreme (Pat) 182. In the said case, the petitioners had prayed for cancellation of integrated 70th Combined (Preliminary) Competitive Examination conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission held on 13.12.2024 and 04.01.2025 and for holding a re-examination. The said writ petitions were dismissed by the Bench holding that though the question papers were leaked at about 1:00 p.m. on 13.12.2024, but that was isolated and episodic incident at one particular centre and that was the time when all the examinees were sitting in sanitized examination halls. It was further held that few of the questions in the examination tallying with questions in the Model Question Paper of the coaching centres was no proof of the Commission having taken Questions Banks from such coaching centres.
110. It emerges from the aforesaid judgments that an examination cannot be annulled on mere conjecture and surmises 109 2025:JHHC:36194-DB since holding of fresh examination ultimately delays the entire selection process as well as it imposes financial burden over the State. Moreover, annulment of examination without proper cause will be detrimental to the students who are not at fault. En masse cancellation is resorted to only on finding that segregation of the tainted candidates from the untainted ones is difficult and a time- consuming task. Annulment of examination is ordered only when it is sufficiently established that the defects/malpractices found therein are to such an extent so as to make it impossible for the examining authority or the Court to determine a fair result of the examination. Every case has to be decided in its own facts and circumstance. In any particular case, if after an in-depth inquiry, it is found that there is systemic irregularities and mass malpractices, the result should be cancelled in its entirety. However, if and when segregation of tainted and untainted candidates is possible, it should be done in consonance with fairness and equity. When broad and deep manipulation in the selection process is proved vitiating its purity, the examination process should be cancelled even if the same would cause inconvenience to the untainted candidates.
111. Thus, the issue before this Court is as to whether the facts of the present case reflect that the alleged breach levelled by the petitioners has been at a systemic level and it affected the integrity of the entire examination process or it is possible to segregate the tainted from the untainted candidates. 110
2025:JHHC:36194-DB The Court's analysis
112. So far the allegation that some candidates were taken to Nepal where they were asked to memorize the answers of few questions is concerned, it is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the counter affidavits dated 06.05.2025 and 16.06.2025 filed by the CID, Ranchi are quite relevant in understanding the depth of the irregularities occurred in the said examination and the deliberate concealment of material facts by the investigating authorities.
113. It is further contended that the contents of these affidavits are self-evident that the incident of question paper leak occurred prior to the examination held on 22.09.2024 and the money changed hands after completion of the examination as consideration for pre-examination access to the question papers.
114. It is also contended that the chargesheet of the accused persons discloses specific factual circumstances demonstrating a well-organised nexus between the intermediaries and the candidates. If the money had been paid in anticipation of receiving the question papers, one could plausibly infer an element of deceit or extortion, but in the present case, payments were made after completion of the test that too by the candidates who subsequently succeeded in the same and thus are incapable of any reasonable explanation. The investigating authorities confirm that the question papers were already compromised prior to conduct of the examination and that the recipients of the leaked materials reciprocated the intermediaries by paying them money only after 111 2025:JHHC:36194-DB obtaining the benefits. The evidence of post-examination financial trails, therefore, stands as an unassailable indicator of actual incident of question paper leak, rather than mere solicitation.
115. It is further submitted that despite several incriminating materials, the investigation appears to have been selectively pursued. None of the successful candidates named in the counter- affidavit filed by the CID on 06.05.2025, has either been charge- sheeted or examined as witness. This deliberate omission suggests a conscious effort to shield the beneficiaries while prosecuting only subordinate personnel.
116. The position adopted by the State is not the product of a comprehensive or impartial investigation, rather it is the result of a manifest failure to conduct the same. The composition of the SIT has been altered at least thrice and every time, the change has been affected without any judicial order or cogent justification. Such frequent re-constitution of the SIT not only undermines the continuity of the investigation, but also raises apprehension of interference and manipulation.
117. It is also argued that the SIT was changed even after the filing of the counter-affidavit dated 06.05.2025, in which the CID had made substantial progress and had uncovered concrete evidence regarding the question paper leak and the related monetary transactions. The CID's subsequent charge-sheets dated 16.06.2025 and 12.09.2025 further reinforced these findings establishing through forensic and documentary proof that the evidences submitted by the petitioners were authentic and un- 112 2025:JHHC:36194-DB tampered. Instead of allowing the CID to continue its inquiry on the right track, the State abruptly replaced the investigating team by falsely representing that such a change was made pursuant to the directions of this Court which is apparently not supported by any order of record.
118. It is further contended that the investigation has conspicuously ignored material evidence voluntarily furnished by the public. The CID, through public notices, had invited information via e-mails, telephone calls, and WhatsApp messages, however neither any reference to these communications finds place in any subsequent status report nor the State has disclosed as to whether veracity of the leads received in this case was ever verified.
119. We have perused the counter affidavits dated 06.05.2025 and 16.06.2025 filed by the CID. In the said affidavits, it has been stated that the names of 28 candidates were found in the mobile phones of the accused persons namely Kundan, Kaushlesh Kumar and others and out of the said 28 candidates, 10 have qualified in the said examination. Some candidates have also given money to the accused persons. It has further been stated that as per the analysis of CDRs of 28 candidates mentioned in the list, location of the mobile phones possessed by 15 candidates were at Beerganj (Nepal)/Raxaul/Motihari (Bihar). It has further been stated in the said counter affidavits that none of the candidates was given question papers, rather they were provided questions and answers 113 2025:JHHC:36194-DB jotted down in five to six hand written sheets and they were told to memorize.
120. Thus, the claim of the petitioners that in the said counter affidavits, it was stated by the CID that there was incident of question paper leak prior to the examination held on 22.09.2024, does not find support from the materials available on record.
121. The SIT has submitted the updated report dated 16.09.2025 before this Court, the relevant part of which is quoted hereinbelow: -
Report of SIT (1) Total of 28 Candidates were said to be taken to Nepal of which only 10 could qualify.
(2) From the screenshot of the seized mobiles of four witnesses namely 1. Premlal Thakur, 2. Anil Kumar 3.
Upendra Raut, and 4. Ramchandra Mandal, it was found that no question or question papers were given to them. 187 answers of 'General Studies' paper were disclosed by the candidates, which appears to be guess work, since only 66 answers were found to be randomly tallying with the set 'A' question paper of the said subject.
(3) A photo of handwritten paper having list of 28 CGL candidates and their agents were found from mobile phone of accused IRB constable Kundan Kumar @ Mantu. The said accused had to collect 114 2025:JHHC:36194-DB money from them. A diary which has been seized from Sandeep Tripathi, has names of candidates and agents. A list of names of candidates were also found in the mobile phone of accused Kundan Kumar @ Mantu. It is also suspicious why the person who took photographs of scattered papers having leaked answers did not take the photographs of persons who were mugging up the so-called leaked answers. Hence the persons allegedly having leaked answers could not be identified.
(4) During the investigation it was revealed that the location of all 28 candidates was found at Motihari and Raxaul in Bihar. The location of conspirators Sandeep Tripathi, Vivek Ranjan, Bablu and Hari Singh @ Binay Sah were found in Motihari and Raxaul during that period.
(5) Out of 10 successful candidates only four successful candidates namely 1. Arvind Kumar 2. Vibhuti Aman 3. Diwakar Kumar Dev 4. Upendra Yadav have made statements that they had gone to Birgunj, Nepal but were not given any question or answer related to CGL examination by the agents. Only one one successful candidate Dayanand Yadav stated that some handwritten answers were taught by Hari Singh @ Binay Sah in Birgunj, Nepal.
(6) During investigation, it was found that five of the 115 2025:JHHC:36194-DB IRB-08, Godda constables who were working as agents, namely 1. Kundan Kumar 2. Gaurav Kumar 3. Abhilash Kumar 4. Krishna Sanehi and 5. Akhilesh Kumar, have been arrested for extorting money from the candidates and out of these five constables only one namely Krishna Sanehi is successful candidate. (7) The involvement of Binay Sah and Anish Singh have been found as the main conspirators in duping the candidates and extorting money from them. Their names and addresses have been verified, notices have been served to their family members and warrant has been issued by the Learned Court, and CID team is trying to locate and arrest them. (8) For the compliance of warrant of Anish Singh and Binay Sah, a team was sent to Kolkata and Gorakhpur respectively on date-2/9/2025 but they are absconding.
(9) Till date, there is no sufficient evidence has been found to support organised paper leak and no original question papers have been found/recovered in any mobile or electronic evidence or in physical mode. No witness so far has given any statement that he/she had or had seen the question paper. The arrested accused have extorted money from the candidates in the name of providing the question papers of JSSC CGL exam, for which sufficient evidence have been 116 2025:JHHC:36194-DB found but no evidence have been found so far of the papers leaked in an organized manner and no original questions paper of 150 questions has been found in any mobile or electronic device. Supplementary investigation is in progress as per the instructions given by SIT.
122. There does not appear any inconsistency between the report of the SIT and the statements made in the counter affidavits dated 06.05.2025 and 16.06.2025 filed by the CID. Though the SIT found that there was sufficient evidence regarding extortion of the candidates by the arrested accused on the pretext of providing question papers and answers of JSSC-CGL examination, but no evidence has been found that there was any incident of question paper leak in an organized manner as no original question paper containing 150 questions in total has been found in the storage of any mobile phone or electronic device.
123. Out of 28 candidates who were allegedly taken to Nepal and were given some questions & answers for mugging up, only 10 got selected for document verification. Thus, the ratio of selected candidates is less than 50% and the said fact appears to be consistent with the report of the SIT to the effect that the accused persons had extorted money from the said 28 students on the pretext of providing them questions/answers of the said examination. Moreover, they were allegedly provided 187 guess questions of the 'General Studies' paper, out of which 117 2025:JHHC:36194-DB only 66 questions were found to be randomly tallying with the set 'A' question paper of the said subject.
124. The petitioners have disclosed some specific instances of alleged malpractice and question paper leak of the said examination, which are mentioned as under: -
(a) Case of Ramchandra Mandal:- Upon his arrival at the Baliyapur Examination Center in the morning, prior to the commencement of the examination, he observed that a person who might be a co-candidate, was engaged in a conversation on mobile phone while simultaneously noting down the answer options on a piece of paper. He did not even imagine that the conversation of said co- candidate was regarding the questions to be asked in the forthcoming examination, however he cleverly captured photograph of the said piece of paper held by the concerned candidate with his mobile phone and after coming out from the examination hall, when he tallied the picture of paper captured by him with the question paper asked in the examination, he found that the same actually contained questions and answers which were asked in the said examination. In view of the shutdown of the internet facility at that time, he could not report the matter, however it clearly goes to suggest that question paper of the said examination was leaked well in advance and 118 2025:JHHC:36194-DB answers of the same were shared with a limited group of candidates so that they could get an edge over others in order to coming in the zone of consideration amongst 2021 candidates who have to be declared successful for offering appointments. He is still possessing his device to prove all what has been said and experienced by him.
(b) Case of Prem Lal Thakur: - He was appearing in the said examination at Kumar B.Ed. College Center in Dhanbad and during course of moving towards the centre on his motorcycle with one of his friends, they saw a co-candidate having conversation over mobile phone with someone and noting down things on his notebook. After having doubts, they questioned the concerned candidate who suspiciously torn the page into pieces and threw the same besides the road itself. His friend videographed everything through his mobile phone and after coming out from the examination center when the torn papers were arranged, it became evident that the said paper contained the questions & answers which were asked in the examination.
(c) Case of Ashish Kumar: - He was going towards his examination centre i.e., 'Makhmandro Examination Center at Ratu, Ranchi' and observed that one individual, believed to be a co-candidate, was talking 119 2025:JHHC:36194-DB on mobile phone while noting down on a piece of paper. He recorded this incident and noted the answers which were written by the said co-candidate on a newspaper. After completion of the examination, he found upon comparison that the answers were matched in verbatim with the answers of the said examination. He took photograph of the newspaper with his mobile phone and preserved the original newspaper to demonstrate that the paper of the examination was leaked well in advance.
(d) Case of Upendra Raut - When he was walking near his examination center i.e B.G.S School, Dhanbad he found that one student was mugging up the answers and on query he told that he was memorizing the answers of the said examination but he did not disclose his name and address and fled away, however he had succeeded in taking photo of the answers which were same as asked in the said examination.
(e) Case of Anil Kumar :- His Center was at Manford School Dhanbad. At Patna Railway Station he found that two students were discussing the questions/answers of the said examination which he recorded in his mobile phone and after examination, he found that out of the noted questions/answers, 35-40 were matched with the questions asked in the 120 2025:JHHC:36194-DB said examination.
125. The allegations levelled by the aforesaid students were inquired by the SIT and it was found that out of 187 answers traced out from the seized mobile phones of 1. Premlal Thakur, 2. Ramchandra Mandal, 3. Upendra Raut and 4. Anil Kumar, only 123 answers were different as several answers were common in the screenshots of mobile phones of more than one person. On matching those answers with Set A 'General Studies' paper of JSSC examination, only 66 answeers were randomly found matching with the answer key.
Name of witnesses Number of answers Answers tallied with the
scribbled by them on examination paper
a piece of paper
Ramchandra 55 35
Mandal
Prem Lal Thakur 26 19
Upendra Raut 49 33
Anil Kumar 57 25
126. It thus indicates that about 53% of the said 123 answers found in screenshots matched with the answer key of the questions of the 'General Studies' paper held on 22.09.2024. None of the above persons have claimed that they had seen any of the co-candidates possessing the original question paper of the said examination.
127. As regards the statement of Santosh Mastana, it is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the SIT has discarded his statement by stating that he had initially omitted the name of 121 2025:JHHC:36194-DB his student namely 'Deepika' but included her name in his subsequent statement. The said inconsistency, however, does not affect the substance of his evidence, which has remained intact regarding the factum of question paper leak. His testimony is corroborative in nature and cannot be discredited on the basis of trivial or technical discrepancies.
128. It is further submitted that the statement of Deepika warrants greater scrutiny as she herself is one of the intervenors in I.A. No. 13039 of 2025 and thereby making her an interested party whose deposition is self-serving. One more person namely 'Manish' who has also supported the statement of Deepika is also one of the intervenors in this case.
129. It is argued that out of the vast corpus of previous years' SSC- CGL questions, only 29 questions were purportedly discussed by Deepika with Santosh Mastana, out of which 11 exactly matched with the questions that appeared in the said examination. What is even more strikingly is that 02 of these 11 matched questions were not at all from previous years' SSC-CGL, but from Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission, 2012 and Intelligence Bureau- Assistant Central Intelligence Officer, 2017 examinations. The possibility of randomly identifying such questions with complete accuracy, especially in mathematics part of the 'General Studies' paper, without prior knowledge of the leaked content, is virtually non-existent. This statistical anomaly itself constitutes strong circumstantial evidence that the 'General Studies' paper was indeed compromised before the said 122 2025:JHHC:36194-DB examination.
130. We have perused the statement of 'Santosh Mastana' who had claimed that on 21.09.2024, between 11:00 PM to 12:00 midnight, he received a whatsapp call from Deepika, who was a student of his online Maths class and she dictated him around 29 answers out of which 11 answers matched in the JSSC-CGL examination held on 22.09.2024. The veracity of the said statement of 'Santosh Mastana' was enquired from 'Deepika' by a female Inspector of Police, however she denied such claim of Santosh Mastana by stating that she had not dictated any answer or question of upcoming JSSCCGL examination to him, rather she had just told him that several questions from previous years' SSC- CGL examinations were asked in JSSC- CGL examination held on 21.09.2024.
131. The police also recorded the statement of 'Manish Kumar' who told that he and Deepika used to help each other in preparation of competitive examinations and when the question paper of JSSC CGL held on 21.09.2024 was uploaded on WhatsApp after completion of the examination, he analyzed and found that many questions were matching with SSC CGL previous years' papers. As such, he told 'Deepika' to solve previous five years' questions of SSC-CGL examination.
132. The SIT issued directions to analyze the question papers of the said examination held on both the dates i.e. 21.09.2024 and 22.09.2024 and after analysis, it was found that in 3rd paper (General Studies) of the said examination held on 21.09.2024, 89 123 2025:JHHC:36194-DB out of 150 questions were repeated from previous years' questions of various examinations. However, majority of Maths and Reasoning questions were repeated from SSC-CGL examinations. Moreover, in the 3rd Paper of the said examination held on 22.09.2024, 90 out of 150 questions were repeated from previous years' questions of various examinations. On the said date also, majority of Maths and Reasoning questions were repeated from the previous years' questions of SSC-CGL examination. So far 66 questions asked in the said examination held on 22.09.2024 which matched with the questions recovered from the mobile phones of the witnesses, it was found that 49 out of the said 66 questions, i.e. 74%, were from previous years' question of SSC-CGL and other examinations.
133. After analyzing the aforesaid facts, the SIT was of the view that several questions of JSSCCGL examination held on 21.09.2024 were found repeated from previous years' questions of SSC-CGL. On the same date i.e. 21.09.2024, in 'General Studies' paper, 85% questions of Maths and all questions of Reasoning got repeated from previous years' questions of SSC-CGL examination as well as other examinations. Out of the repeated questions, most were from previous years' question of SSC-CGL examination. The similar trend was also followed in the examination held on 22.09.2024. 90% questions of Maths and all questions of Reasoning in the examination held on 22.09.2024 got repeated from previous years' questions of SSC-CGL examination as well as othe examinations. Thus, Deepika and Manish started solving 124 2025:JHHC:36194-DB previous years' questions of SSC-CGL examinations which was wrongly projected by Santosh Mastana as leaked questions for upcoming JSSC-CGL examination. Moreover, as per the statement of Santosh Mastana, out of 29 questions told to him by Deepika, 11 questions matched and thus the ratio of matched questions was less than 50%. Conclusion of question paper leak cannot be made on the basis of conjecture and surmises unless concrete evidence of paper leak is found.
134. A supplementary counter affidavit was filed by the respondent nos. 3 to 5 on 17.10.2025 annexing a copy of Press Release (Annexure-M to the said counter affidavit). In the said Press Release, seat matrix summary report, data related to shortlisted candidates from common merit list called for document verification district/centre wise along with other relevant data have been furnished, which have not been controverted by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The said data are given hereunder for the ready reference in the present case:-
Seat Matrix Summary Report of JGGLCCE-2023 for the examinations held on 21.09.2024 & 22.09.2024 Sl. No. Name of Division Name of District No. of School Seating Capacity
1. Santhal Pargana GODDA 17 6192
2. JAMTARA 17 4584
3. PAKUR 15 5616 4 DUMKA 30 9396 5 DEOGHAR 44 15840 6 SAHIBGANJ 13 3036 7 PALAMU PALAMU 16 7476 8 GARHWA 19 5292 9 LATEHAR 18 3948 125 2025:JHHC:36194-DB 10 SOUTH CHHOTAN RANCHI 136 61284 AGPUR 11 GUMLA 17 5820
12. LOHARDAGA 20 5796 13 SIMDEGA 10 4140 14 KHUNTI 14 4620 15 KOLHAN WEST 28 10488 SINGHBHUM 16 EAST 82 37368 SINGHBHUM 17 SARAIKELA 30 12864 KHARSAWAN 18 NORTH CHHOTAN HAZARIBAGH 70 26148 AGPUR 19 DHANBAD 74 28116 20 RAMGARH 35 10452 21 CHATRA 14 5148 22 KODERMA 19 7080 23 BOKARO 64 29700 24 GIRIDIH 22 10560 Grand Total 824 320964 Center-wise selection data Sl.no. No. of centers Percentage selection for document verification
1. 13 2-2.6%
2. 17 1.50-1.99%
3. 48 1-1.49%
4. 133 0.5-0.99%
5. All other centers Less than 0.5%
135. It is evident from center-wise compiled data that no center has shown a selection rate that could be considered anomalous or unusually high.
126
2025:JHHC:36194-DB District wise analysis of shortlisted candidates for Document Verification Tentative Data Sl.No. District Total Appeared Total shortlisted (%)of shortlisted 1 BOKARO 27275 189 0.69 2 CHATRA 5040 40 0.79 3 DEOGHAR 15485 96 0.62 4 DHANBAD 28144 315 1.12 5 DUMKA 9706 46 0.47 6 EAST 27571 260 0.94 SINGHBHUM 7 GARHWA 7009 43 0.61 8 GIRIDIH 11412 105 0.92 9 GODDA 3413 6 0.18 10 GUMLA 7227 41 0.57 11 HAZARIBAGH 26810 275 1.03 12 JAMTARA 2362 5 0.21 13 KHUNTI 6670 19 0.28 14 KODERMA 4677 12 0.26 15 LATEHAR 3605 5 0.14 16 LOHARDAGA 5904 19 0.32 17 PAKUR 4824 4 0.08 18 PALAMU 9726 119 1.22 19 RAMGARH 11739 63 0.54 20 RANCHI 60341 432 0.72 21 SAHIBGANJ 3816 12 0.31 22 SARAIKELA 9418 61 0.65 KHARSAWAN 23 SIMDEGA 2787 12 0.43 24 WEST 9733 52 0.53 SINGHBHUM Successful candidates on both dates Date 21.09.2024 22.09.2024 Total Total Allocation 3,20,493 3,19,407 6,39,900 Total Appeared 1,17,666 1,87,028 3,04,694 Total successful 82 2149 2231 candidates called for document verification 127 2025:JHHC:36194-DB
136. It appears from the above data that out of the total candidates who appeared in the examination held on 21.09.2024, 82 candidates were selected whereas out of the total candidates who appeared in the examination held on 22.09.2024, 2149 candidates were selected.
Number of Question & Marks 1st Paper (Hindi & English Language) - 120 x 3 = 360 - Qualifying 2nd Paper (Tribal & Regional Languages) - 100 x 3 = 300 3rd Paper (GK/GS) -150 x 3 = 450 Total Qualified in 1st Paper - 1,24,255 (30% Slab) Total Qualified in all Papers - 26398 (Common Merit List) 2nd Paper Cut-off Marks Language Minimum Maximum Khortha 260 300 Nagpuri 257 300 Hindi 165 248 2nd Paper Selection Sl.NO. Language Appeared Qualified Percentage (%) 1 KHORTHA 76830 1106 1.51 2 NAGPURI 40787 589 1.44 3 HINDI 120173 175 0.15 4 SANTHALI 16679 117 0.70 5 ENGLISH 23758 90 0.37 128 2025:JHHC:36194-DB 6 HO 5337 39 0.73 7 PANCHPARGANIA 4363 14 0.32 8 KUDUKH 3606 14 0.38 9 MUNDARI 3972 13 0.32 10 KURMALI 2759 10 0.36 11 URDU 2901 03 0.10 12 KHARIYA 462 01 0.20 13 SANSKRIT 470 00 00 14 BANGLA 2340 00 00 15 ORIYA 257 00 00 Total 3,04,694 2231 Date wise Cut-off Marks of GS Paper 21.09.2024 Category Minimum Maximum UR 275 402 EWS 390 402 SC 263 263 ST - -
EBC/BC2 278 378 22.09.2024 Category Minimum Maximum UR 236 399 EWS 219 381 SC 208 366 ST 152 364 EBC/BC2 229 392 PH 140 - 129 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Result of Claimed Centers Center Code Center Name Candidates appeared/shortlisted for Document Verification 281 Kumar B.Ed College, 240/4 Dhanbad 294 UPG High School, 312/3 Baliapur, Dhanbad 776 Bethany Convent High 480/18 School, Makhmandro, Ratu, Ranchi 287 B.G.S. High School, 168/5 Loyabad, Dhanbad
137. Following are the key points that have emerged from the facts of the instant case, aforementioned data as well as the investigation report of the SIT with respect to the allegations levelled by the petitioners: -
(i) No original question paper has been recovered so far, either from possession of the accused persons or from the mobile phones of the witnesses.
(ii) The witnesses have also not claimed that they had seen any student with original question paper of the said examination. Thus, allegation of paper leak in the said examination has not yet been proved.
(iii) There is no information about leakage of question paper so far, either from any examination center or during transit from Kolkata to the examination centers.
(iv) No allegation of paper leak has been made against the 130 2025:JHHC:36194-DB officials of the JSSC.
(v) The allegation levelled by 'Santosh Mastana' was also not corroborated by the statement of 'Deepika' and her friend 'Manish'.
(vi) The persons who took photographs of scattered papers having answers of the questions had not taken photographs of the persons who were said to be mugging up the so-called leaked answers and thus those persons could not be identified.
(vii) Most of the questions which were spread in the name of leaked questions were actually the previous years' question of SCC-CGL and other examinations. As such, there is every possibility that the guess questions were spread in the name of leaked question paper(s).
(viii) In Nepal incident also, the accused persons as well as the concerned candidates have not disclosed that they were provided the question paper(s) of the said examination, rather they were given 123 questions jotted down on a piece of paper for mugging up out of which only 66 questions were asked in the examination.
Moreover, only 10 candidates out of 28 candidates, who were taken to Nepal, have been selected in the said examination and thus the selection rate is even less than 50%.
(ix) The data of successful candidates called for document verification as has been filed by the State reflects that 131 2025:JHHC:36194-DB there is no unusual spike in the number of successful candidates from any particular district or centre.
(x) A comparison of the cut-off marks (minimum & maximum) between the 'General Studies' Paper asked on the 1st date (275 - 402) with the 'General Studies' Paper asked on the 2nd date (236 - 399) suggests that the cut off marks of both the dates are homogenous.
(xi) The percentage of selected candidates for document verification from three districts is 1-1.22%, from 12 districts, it is 0.5%-0.99% and from 9 districts, it is less than 0.5%. Thus, none of the districts shows any anomalous or excessively high selection rate as all fall within the reasonable ranges.
(xii) The petitioners have claimed that at few centres, some students were mugging up the answers of the questions which were subsequently asked in the said examination, however the result of the said centres does not show any unusual spike.
(xiii) It is an admitted fact that the log files and time log files were not available in the mobile phones of the witnesses. No GPS co-ordinates were found in their mobile phones and even two applications under the fake GPS were found in the mobile phone of Prem Lal Thakur. The petitioners have claimed that log files were missing from the mobile phones of the witnesses due to their automatic deletion after certain interval of time. It has further been 132 2025:JHHC:36194-DB claimed that the delay in lodging the FIR and belated seizure of the mobile devices by the investigating authorities may be attributed for non-availability of the log files. As regards the installation of fake GPS applications, it has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that mere existence of such applications does not indicate any tampering. Moreover, the FSL report would clearly disclose that there was no manipulation in the photographs.
We are of the view that since the log files were missing in the mobile phones of the witnesses, it is difficult to come to a definite conclusion that the photographs were clicked by them prior to commencement of the examination. The presence of fake GPS applications in the mobile phone of the witnesses also creates doubt on the authenticity of their statements. Moreover, they had not seen original question paper booklet with respect to the said examination in the hands of any candidate, rather they had seen few candidates scribbling some questions on a piece of paper out of which some questions were asked in the examination that too were of previous years' questions of SSC-CGL as well as other examinations.
(xiv) The State has contended that since the online FIR was lodged in a wrong jurisdiction and the cause of action had arisen in other jurisdiction resulting in delay lodging of FIR relating to the alleged question paper leak. It has 133 2025:JHHC:36194-DB further been submitted that the show cause notices have been issued to the erring officials and they have given their respective replies.
(xv) No allegation of question paper leak has been claimed regarding the examination held on 21.09.2024. (xvi) Out of 824 centres, only four incidents have been reported by the petitioners regarding alleged paper leak and that too without any cogent evidence.
(xvii) The investigation of the case is still continuing. Nonetheless, even if the claim of the petitioners that certain questions were known to few candidates is accepted to be true, the same cannot be considered as question paper leak on systemic level.
(xviii) On both dates of the said examination, the internet service was shut down in the entire State of Jharkhand and as such, if some instance of alleged question paper leak as claimed by the petitioners is treated to be true, the same was only episodic with no evidence of widespread malpractice.
(xix) So far as the incident of Nepal is concerned, all the tainted candidates have been identified and they can appropriately be segregated from the untainted candidates.
(xx) The petitioners have not been able to show that the sanctity of the said examination was compromised at systemic level.
134
2025:JHHC:36194-DB (xxi) Till date, the investigation of SIT does not reveal systemic paper leak and widespread malpractice. (xxii) The learned senior counsel for the writ petitioners have argued that in the examination held on 21.09.2024 having candidates of 'Hindi Language' paper, only 82 candidates out of 1,17,666 were selected for document verification whereas in the examination held on 22.09.2024 having candidates of other regional languages, number of selected candidates were 2149. The said argument of the learned senior counsel for the petitioners has been satisfactorily answered by the learned Advocate General as well as counsel for the intervenors that such spike of successful candidates in the examination held on 22.09.2024 was only due to the reason that regional language papers were high scoring as compared to the 'Hindi Language' paper. Moreover, the higher selection of the successful candidates has been made only in 'Nagpuri' and 'Khortha' languages.
138. In view of the aforesaid reasons, we are of the considered view that in the present case, there is no sufficient ground for cancellation of the process of the said examination.
139. Learned senior counsel for the writ petitioners by referring to the Jharkhand Competitive Examination (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023 submit that the primary objective of the said Act is to prohibit the use of unfair means in any competitive examination. 135
2025:JHHC:36194-DB
140. It is also submitted that Section 2(1)(g)(1) and (2) of the Act, 2023 provide an expansive interpretation of what constitutes "unfair means." Section 2(1)(g)(1) includes within its ambit of "Unfair Means" the act of taking any "unfair aid, other unauthorized aid" or using any unauthorized electronic or mechanical device or gadget etc. by an examinee in the computer based examinations. Further, Section 2(1)(g)2(i) expressly encompasses within the scope of unfair means the act of "impersonation" or "leakage" or "attempt for leakage" or "conspiracy for leakage" of question paper by a person, whereas Section 2(1)(g)(2)(iv) covers any act with respect to "direct or indirect assistance" by a person to the examinee in an unauthorized manner in the competitive examination. Therefore, obtaining or utilizing leaked answer keys in connection with a competitive examination squarely falls within the ambit of "unfair means" as defined under Section 2(1)(g) of the Act, 2023. Such conduct is expressly prohibited under Section 4 of the Act, 2023 and attracts penalties under Section 12 of the said Act. The expressions used in the statute must be interpreted in a purposive and liberal manner to advance the legislative intent, rather than adopting a narrow or literal construction.
141. On the other hand, the learned Advocate General submits that section 7 of the Act, 2023 only talks about preventing any unauthorized person to receive or attempt to receive or have possession of such question paper or answer sheet or Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) sheet or any part or copy thereof in any 136 2025:JHHC:36194-DB manner. Hence, alleged possession of piece of paper containing some questions/answers would not come under the ambit of the said section of the Act, 2023.
142. We do not want to delve into the said issue in view of the fact that the FIR has already been lodged in this matter and few accused persons have also been arrested the investigation of which is still continuing. If any person is found violating the provisions of the Act, 2023 attracting criminal culpability, he/she will be proceeded with accordingly by the competent criminal court.
Argument qua sending the investigation of the alleged paper leak in the said examination to the C.B.I.
143. Mr. Gopal Shankarnarayanan, learned Senior Counsel for the intervenors submits that in the instant Public Interest Litigation, the petitioners have made a prayer for issuance of direction for court monitored investigation by a SIT with respect to the incident of alleged question paper leak in the said examination and the grievance of the petitioners has been redressed as the investigation by the duly constituted SIT is going on.
144. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of some of the intervenors, refutes the claim of the petitioners with respect to sending the matter to the CBI by putting reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Legislative Council, U.P, Lucknow Vs. Sushil Kumar reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2254 wherein it has been held that only in very exceptional cases, where the integrity of the 137 2025:JHHC:36194-DB process or investigation has been compromised and there exists prima facie material to indicate that the entire investigation is tainted, an order for transfer of investigation to the CBI can be passed. Such an extraordinary power is not to be exercised as a matter of routine merely because a party has levelled certain allegations against the local police without credible supporting evidence.
145. It is submitted that no such case is made out in the present case and the allegations levelled are bald, vague, and speculative.
146. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners of W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024, submits that the prayers made in the present Public Interest Litigation must be read in their entirety and not in isolation. While the petitioners have sought constitution of a Court- monitored SIT, that request necessarily stems from the acknowledged failure of the existing SIT which has been constituted and re-constituted repeatedly at the discretion of the State without transparency or judicial sanction. Such arbitrary restructuring of the investigative mechanism has eroded both the credibility and continuity of the investigation, defeating the very objective of impartial investigation.
147. It is further contended that CBI investigation has been specifically prayed for in W.P.(C) No. 1476 of 2025, and the said demand is reiterated and emphasized in the present PIL.
148. It is also contended that the ongoing investigation conducted by the SIT has failed to inspire confidence or yield 138 2025:JHHC:36194-DB substantive results despite passage of several months. In the present facts and circumstances, continued retention of the probe within the hands of the same administrative apparatus would only perpetuate delay and diminish evidentiary value.
149. It is further contended that a timely transfer of the investigation is therefore imperative not only to preserve the integrity of the evidence, but also to restore public faith in fairness of the entire examination process.
150. Learned senior counsel for the said petitioners puts reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pooja Pal Vs. Union of India and Others reported in (2016) 3 SCC 135. In the said case, Their Lordships have held that the extraordinary power of the constitutional courts under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution of India qua the issuance of direction to CBI for conducting investigation must be exercised with great caution. It has further been held that although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down in this regard, however such an order cannot be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. The extraordinary power under the said Articles can be invoked in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instill confidence in investigation or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and for enforcing the fundamental rights.
151. It is thus well settled principle of law that the 139 2025:JHHC:36194-DB investigation of a matter cannot be referred to CBI in routine manner, rather the same is ordered only in very exceptional cases where the integrity of the process or investigation has been compromised and there exists prima facie material to indicate that the entire investigation is tainted.
152. In the case in hand, though the petitioners have claimed that the investigation of SIT has been compromised, however they have not been able to substantiate the said claim by bringing on record sufficient material. The petitioners have failed to show that the investigation of SIT is tainted and thus we do not find any reason to refer the present matter to CBI for investigation. On mere ground that the constitution of SIT was changed on few occasions is not sufficient to suggest that the investigation being made by SIT is defective. One of the allegations of the petitioners is that the material evidence furnished by the public has been ignored by the SIT. However, it is evident from the record that the evidences furnished by the public have been duly considered by the SIT. Moreover, some evidences have been found false and rest are under investigation.
153. In view of the aforesaid discussions, we deem it appropriate to pass the following directions: -
(i) The status quo granted by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2024 passed in W.P.(PIL) No. 5717 of 2024 is hereby vacated.
(ii) The respondent-JSSC is directed to publish the final result of the said examination and the State 140 2025:JHHC:36194-DB Government is further directed to appoint the successful candidates on the respective posts.
(iii) The SIT is directed to complete the investigation of the case within six months from the date of passing of the present judgement.
(iv) Out of 28 candidates who were allegedly taken to Nepal for mugging up the questions/answers, 10 were called for document verification and as such the final result of the said 10 candidates will be kept in abeyance till the investigation of SIT is completed as well as their selection will be subject to the final outcome of the investigation.
(v) If in the investigation of SIT, some more successful candidates are found involved in malpractice, the State shall take appropriate action against the said candidates.
154. The writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
155. The pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) December 03, 2025 Ritesh/A.F.R. Uploaded on 03.12.2025 141