Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Jharkhand/
  4. 2024/
  5. April

Surendra Kumar Mahto vs. the State of Jharkhand Through the Secretary Higher and Technical Education

Decided on 30 April 2024• Citation: WPC/4748/2021• High Court of Jharkhand
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                      IN THE  HIGH  COURT  OF JHARKHAND    AT RANCHI                
                                    W.P.(S) No. 4748 of 2021                        
                     Surendra Kumar Mahto                                           
                                                              … … Petitioner        
                                       - V E R S U S                                
                                                   –                                
               1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Higher and Technical Education,
                 Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi, Jharkhand        
               2. The Director, Technical Education, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi   
               3. The Joint Secretary, Higher and Technical Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal
                 House, Doranda, Ranchi, Jharkhand                                  
               4.                                                                   
                 The Principal, Government Woman’s Polytechnic, Tharpakana, Lalpur, Ranchi,
                 Jharkhand                                                          
               5. The Accountant General (A & E), Office of Accountant General, Doranda,
                 Ranchi                                                             
                                                            …  … Respondents.       
                   CORAM:    HON'BLE  DR. JUSTICE S. N. PATHAK                      
               For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate                       
               For the State  Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, AC to GP-I                      
               For the Accountant General: Mr. Arvind Kumar Mehta, Advocate         
      10/30.04.2024                                                                 
                        Heard the parties.                                          
                 2.     At the very outset, Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel appearing on
                   behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has received most of the part of
                   retiral benefits, except L.T.A. allowance. The respondents have yet to take a
                   decision on the over stay in the official quarter and as such a sizeable amount
                   of Rs.54,810/- has been withheld by them.                        
                 3.     Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, AC to learned GP-I submits that suffice it would
                   be if a direction be given to the petitioner to file fresh representation before the
                   competent authority to release the amount against the head of L.T.A. and also
                   to adjust amount against over stay in the official quarter.      
                 4.     In view of fair submission of counsel for the parties, petitioner is
                   directed to file representation before the respondent no. 2 which shall be
                   considered in accordance with law. If it is found that petitioner is entitled for
                   L.T.A., the same shall be disbursed to the petitioner. Further, a decision shall be
                   taken regarding adjustment of amount against over stay in official quarter. Let
                   the entire exercise be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date
                   of such representation. It is made clear that entire amount after adjustment of
                   amount against over stay in official quarter be paid to the petitioner within a
                   further period of two weeks.                                     
                 5.     With the aforementioned observations and directions, the writ petition
                   stands disposed of.                                              
                                                      (Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)         
              RC