Jharkhand High Court

Meena Kandhway v. State of Jharkhand & Ors.

2026:JHHC:24626 · WPC/2940/2012

Decision date
2026-08-17
Text availability
Full text
Judges
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Source: Indian High Court Judgments, AWS Open Data (CC BY 4.0) ↗

Connected provisions and cases

No further provision or case links are recorded.

Judgment text

2026:JHHC:24626 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI W.P. (C.) No. 2940 of 2012 ---- Meena Kandhway, wife of Pramod Kumar Kandhway, resident of Peti Road, Pachamba, Ward No.1, Giridih, PO – Pachamba, PS – Giridih (T), District – Giridih, Jharkhand .... Petitioner -- Versus -- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, PO – Dhurwa, PS – Jagannathpur, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. The Deputy Commissioner-cum-Secretary, District Planning Committee, Giridih, PO and PS – Giridih, District – Giridih 4. The Vice-Chairman, acting as Chairman, Giridih Municipality, Giridih, PO – Giridih, PS- Giridih (T), District – Giridih 5. The Executive Officer, Giridih Municipality, Giridih, PO – Giridih, PS – Giridih (T), District – Giridih 6. Shri Narayan Bigyan Prabhakar, son of unknown, Ex-Executive Officer, Giridih Municipality, Giridih, PO – Giridih, PS – Giridih (T), District – Giridih. At present posted in Personnel Department, Jharkhand, PO – Dhurwa, PS – Jagannathpur, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand 7. Shri Kaushlesh Yadav, son of unknown, Assistant Engineer, Giridih Municipality, Giridih, PO – Giridih, PS – Giridih (T), District - Giridih .... Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- None For the State :- Mrs. Rukmini Kumari, Advocate ----

05/17.08.2026 On repeated calls, nobody has responded on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the State is present. --1-- W.P. (C.) No. 2940 of 2012 2026:JHHC:24626 2. On 10.12.2012, time was taken and the matter was adjourned for 12.12.2012 and thereafter the matter was listed on 25.06.2024 and on that day also nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Identical is the situation today that on repeated calls nobody has responded on behalf of the petitioner. 3. This matter is of the year 2012 and it appears that the petitioner has lost interest in this matter, as such this writ petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 17.08.2026 Sangam/ --2-- W.P. (C.) No. 2940 of 2012