Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sunita Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors

Sunita Devi vs State of Jharkhand and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Jul 30, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1008035

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sunita Devi

Respondent

State of Jharkhand and ors

Excerpt

in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi w.p.s. no. 2692 of 2010 sunita devi ..petitioner versus the state of jharkhand & ors. .respondents ----- coram:honble mr. justice narendra nath tiwari for the petitioner : mr. binod kumar dubey, advocate for the respondents : jc to g.p. iii --- i.a. no. 5235 o”05. 30-07-2013 in this i.a., the petitioner has prayed for addition of prayer and amendment in the writ petition and also for addition of anju devi as respondent in the writ petition. it has been stated that during pendency of the writ petition, one anju devi has been appointed on the post which has been claimed by the petitioner in the writ petition. in view of the said subsequent event, the petitioner has to add appropriate prayer challenging the appointment of anju devi. it has been submitted that the amendment prayed for is based on the same factual background and the same, if allowed, would not change the nature of the writ petition. learned j.c. to g.p.iii, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has no objection in allowing the petitioner's application. considering that the amendment prayed for is based on the same factual foundation, which is already on record, and that the proposed amendment, if allowed, would not change the nature of the writ petition, the amendment prayed for is allowed. the petitioner is also permitted to add anju devi as respondent no. 8 in the writ petition. i.a. is disposed of. ( narendra nath tiwari, j) rakesh/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.S. No. 2692 of 2010 Sunita Devi ..Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. .Respondents ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the Respondents : JC to G.P. III --- I.A. No. 5235 o”

05. 30-07-2013 In this I.A., the petitioner has prayed for addition of prayer and amendment in the writ petition and also for addition of Anju Devi as respondent in the writ petition. It has been stated that during pendency of the writ petition, one Anju Devi has been appointed on the post which has been claimed by the petitioner in the writ petition. In view of the said subsequent event, the petitioner has to add appropriate prayer challenging the appointment of Anju Devi. It has been submitted that the amendment prayed for is based on the same factual background and the same, if allowed, would not change the nature of the writ petition. Learned J.C. to G.P.III, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has no objection in allowing the petitioner's application. Considering that the amendment prayed for is based on the same factual foundation, which is already on record, and that the proposed amendment, if allowed, would not change the nature of the writ petition, the amendment prayed for is allowed. The petitioner is also permitted to add Anju Devi as respondent no. 8 in the writ petition. I.A. is disposed of. ( Narendra Nath Tiwari, J) Rakesh/

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial