SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Jhk) 4321

HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND – Appellant
Versus
RAJ KISHORE PRASAD – Respondent
LPA 716 / 2023



##PAGE1##

2025:JHHC:38750-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

L.P.A. No.716 of 2023

-----

1. The State of Jharkhand.

2. Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department,

Government of Jharkhand, Ρ.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa,

Ranchi.

3. Under Secretary, Road Construction Department,

Government of Jharkhand, Ρ.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa,

Ranchi.

4. Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department,

Government of Jharkhand, Ρ.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa,

Ranchi.

5. Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department,

Government of Jharkhand, Ρ.Ο. and P.S. Giridih Sadar,

Ranchi.

… … Appellants

Versus

Raj Kishore Prasad, Son of Late Lekhraj Das, Resident of

Village-Chorsua, P.O. Pawapuri, P.S. Giriyak, District-

Nalanda (Bihar). … … Respondent

-------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

-------

For the appellants : Ms. Sunita Kumari, A.C. to Sr. S.C.-II

------

Order No. 07/Dated 23rd December, 2025

Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant appeal is under Clause 10 of the Letters

Patent directed against the order/judgment dated

11.04.2023 passed in W.P.(S) No.6481 of 2014. The appeal

since has been filed after a delay of 250 days and, as such,

to condone the delay one application under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act, has been filed being I.A. No.8323 of 2024.

1

##PAGE2##

2025:JHHC:38750-DB

2. This Court, therefore, deems it fit and proper to first

consider the interlocutory application before entering into

the issue on merit.

I.A. No.8323 of 2024

3. The instant application has been filed under Section

5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay.

4. The reason has been assigned, as per the averments

made in paragraphs 4 to 9, and this Court, considering the

reason to be sufficient cause to condone the delay, is

condoning the delay.

5. Accordingly, the delay of 250 days in preferring the

appeal is hereby condoned.

6. The instant interlocutory application (I.A. No.8323 of

2024) stands allowed.

L.P.A. No.716 of 2023

7. The instant appeal has been filed under Clause 10 of

the Letters Patent directed against the order/judgment dated

11.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court

whereby and whereunder the impugned order as contained

in notification No.8717(s) dated 23.09.2013 issued under the

signature of Deputy Secretary, Road Construction

Department, Government of Jharkhand whereby the

petitioner has been inflicted punishment of censor and

stoppage of three annual increments with cumulative effect

as well as the order as contained in notification No.6419(s)

2

##PAGE3##

2025:JHHC:38750-DB

dated 28.08.2014 issued under the signature of Under

Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of

Jharkhand affirming the order passed by the disciplinary

authority was quashed and set aside.

Factual Matrix

8. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made

in the writ petition, which are required to be enumerated,

read as under :-

The petitioner was appointed as Research Assistant

in Road Construction Department, Supaul Division, Bihar

on 07.07.1981 and he superannuated from service on

31.08.2016 from the post of Assistant Director, Quality

Control, National Highway Division, Hazaribag.

A departmental proceeding was initiated against the

petitioner when he was posted as Assistant Director, Quality

Control (Road Sub-division), National Highway Division,

Medininagar, Daltonganj as informed by the respondent no.5

to the respondent no.4 vide letter as contained in memo

no.2473 dated 20.12.2007, levelling various charges of

irregularities committed by him while discharging the duty

on the said post at Giridih with a recommendation to take

disciplinary action against the petitioner.

Accordingly, a memo of charge was also served to him

by the respondent no.4 on 28.01.2008, particularly, for not

handing over some measurement books to his successor in

3

##PAGE4##

2025:JHHC:38750-DB

post, for conspiring in disappearance of some articles from

the laboratory, for submitting fabricated enquiry report for a

certain period and also for unauthorized absence from the

present place of posting.

There

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top