ANITA ANJU KHESS v. STATE OF JHARKHAND
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2025-12-01. ANITA ANJU KHESS v. STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(S) No. 6833 of 2025 ----- Anita Anju Khess, aged about 54 years, wife of Sanjay Tigga, resident of Pathalkudwa, Albert Compound, Purulia Road, Ranchi, P. O. G. P. O. , P. S. Lower Bazar, District Ranchi … Petitioner(s). Versus 1. State of Jharkhand. 2. The Principal Secretary, Higher & Technical Education Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P. O. and P. S. Doranda, District Ranchi 3. The Director, Higher Education, Higher & Technical Education Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P. O. and P. S. Doranda, District Ranchi 4. The Management of Gossner College, Ranchi through its Secretary, Club Road, Ranchi, P. O. G. P. O. , P. S. Lalpur, District Ranchi. 5. The Ranchi University, Ranchi through its Registrar, having its office near Saheed Chowk, P. O. G. P. O. , P. S. Kotwali, District Ranchi. … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. A. S. Pati, Advocate Mr.
Akshay Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Ruchi Mukti, AC to AAG-IA For Ranchi University : Mr. Sharon Toppo, Advocate …...... 02 /01. 12. 2025: Heard the parties. 2. By filing this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to pay her salary and other benefits th th in terms of the recommendation of the 6 and 7 Pay Revision Commission with all consequential benefits w. e. f 14. 09. 2008. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was earlier appointed as Lecturer in History in Gossner College, Ranchi (minority aided institution) on 01. 07. 2002 against post which was non-financed by the State. It is his contention that petitioner was absorbed on 14. 09. 2008 in the post “with finance” which was financed by the Government. It is the grievance of the petitioner that since the petitioner was absorbed on 14. 09.
2008 against a post which was “with finance”, she is entitled to get all the benefits on and from that date including the benefit of pay revision in terms th th of 6 and 7 Pay Revision Commission. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that if the petitioner is entitled for any relief the same will be considered, if the petitioner files a detailed representation before the University and also before the State Authorities. 5. Thus, I direct the petitioner to file representation before the respondent no. 3-the Director, Higher Education, Higher and Technical Education Department and the respondent no. 5-the Ranchi University through it Registrar, who will consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate order. 6. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit as claimed by her, the same should be disbursed with all consequential benefits. 7. If it is necessary to grant fund to the University and the College, the State will do the same. 8.
If any part of the claim of the petitioner is rejected, the reasons thereof should be communicated to the petitioner also. 9. The petitioner should file representation within four weeks from today annexing all the documents which she relies upon. On receipt of the same the respondents will dispose of the claims of the petitioner within twelve weeks by passing a reasoned order. If it is found that she is entitled for the benefits the same should be extended to the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. 10. It is made clear that there should be no lack of coordination between the University and the State, while disposing of the application of the petitioner. 11. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J. ) 01. 12. 2025 Tanuj/CP-2 Uploaded on 02. 12. 2025
Source: High Court of Jharkhand. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.