The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative v. Reforms and Rajbhasha, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI 1. Tarun Kumar Gon 2. Bhim Sen Mandal 3. Supratik Mandal W.P.(S). No. 1509 of 2016 ---------- ………… Petitioners 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Versus Reforms and Rajbhasha, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 3. Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 4. Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 5. Director, Higher Education, School Education and Literacy Department, Ranchi. 6. Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar through its Registrar. ………… Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK For the Petitioners
Legal Reasoning
similar issue fell for consideration before this Court in W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases and this Court after hearing the parties vide its judgment delivered on 16.02.2022, allowed the said writ petitions with the following directions: “18. …….……….. I hereby direct the respondents to initiate process of counseling for the present petitioners by way of last opportunity, since they have obtained more marks than the last selected candidates in the merit list. The petitioners shall approach the Deputy Commissioners of the concerned Districts, as early as possible, preferably, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner shall initiate the process of counseling after giving proper notice to the petitioners by way of Press Communique, advertising the notice in the local newspaper having the wide circulation in the concerned Districts and also by putting the notice on the Notice Board of the Office of concerned District Superintendent of Education and thereafter, the entire process of counseling be completed within a period of further four weeks subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria and also if the present petitioners have secured more marks than the last selected candidates.” 5. Thereafter, the respondent-State challenged the said order before the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court in LPA No. 203 of 2022 and the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court dismissed the LPA preferred by the respondent-State. The relevant para of the said judgment reads as under: “57. This Court, on entirety of facts and circumstances, is of the view that the order passed by learned Single Judge needs no interference by this Court and the direction so 2 passed by learned Single Judge needs no interference by this Court and is required to be complied with at an earliest as the vacancies is of the year 2015 and it must be put to logical end without snatching right of candidates, if they are otherwise eligible. Therefore, the appellants-State are hereby directed to: I. Initiate the process of counseling forthwith for the present petitioners by way of last opportunity as it is alleged they have obtained more marks than the last selected candidates in the merit list in the respective districts. II. The petitioners shall approach the Deputy Commissioners of the concerned Districts, as early as possible, preferably, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. III. However, in the meantime, the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district shall give proper notice to the petitioners by way of Press Communique, advertising the notice in the local newspaper having the wide circulation in the concerned Districts and also by putting the notice on the Notice Board of the Office of concerned District Superintendent of Education. IV. This Court hopes and trusts that the entire process of counseling will be completed within a period of further eight weeks subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria and also if the present petitioners have secured more marks than the last selected candidates. V. It is made clear that the entire process of selection shall be made strictly in accordance with relevant rules/regulations and judicial pronouncements, as mentioned above, within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. VI. Let it be made clear that no further counselling shall be held for any reasons whatsoever as the advertisement for appointment of these teachers are of 2015 and the aforesaid facts and issued directions have been circumstances of the case, which shall be not taken as precedent.” in peculiar 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners streneously submits that since similar issue has already been decided by this Court and further, in view order passed by this Court in W.P.(S). No. 3115 of 2015, the notification dated 26.02.2015, issued by the Principal Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, by which, the cases of petitioners have been turned down, has already been quashed and set aside, present petitioners are also entitled 3 for the similar benefits what has been extended to the petitioners of W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has no objection to the same. 8. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and in view of the fact that earlier notification of the State regarding validity of degree of Deoghar Hindi Vidyapith has already been quashed and set aside, this writ petition is being disposed of in terms of the order dated 16.02.2022, passed by this Court in case of in W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases as well as LPA No. 203 of 2022 and if the cases of the present petitioners are found to be same and similar to the cases of the petitioners in W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases, the present petitioners are also entitled for the same benefits. 9. Accordingly, I hereby direct the respondents-authorities to verify the factual aspects/issues involved in the present writ petition vis. a vis. factual aspects/issues involved in W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases, and if the facts/issues involved in the present writ petition is found to be similar to the aforementioned writ petition, the same benefits may be extended to the present petitioners also in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 10. Let it be made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the case. 11. With these observations and directions, this writ petition stands
Arguments
: Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Rahul Basak, Advocate For the State For the Resp. No. 6 06/ 22.04.2024 Heard the parties. Mr. Suman Ghosh, Advocate : AC to SC : Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate Mr. Bajrang Kumar, Advocate ---------- 2. Petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for direction upon the respondents to appoint them to the post of Teachers for Class-VI to VIII after quashing the notification dated 26.02.2015 issued by the Principal Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners draws the attention of the Court towards order dated 10.05.2022 passed by the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court in W.P.(S). No. 3115 of 2015 and submits that by the said order, the Hon’ble Court has been pleased to quash and set aside the impugned notification dated 26.02.2015 and as such, the issue is now no more res-integra. Learned counsel further argues that while disposing the said writ petition, the Division Bench has clearly observed that the impugned notification dated 26.02.2015, issued by the State cannot be given retrospective effect and the same will 1 operate prospectively. Learned counsel further submits that since the cases of petitioners for appointment to the post of Teachers for Class-VI to VIII has been turned down on the ground that certificates issued by the Deoghar Hindi Vidyapith is not valid and the said notification of the State has been quashed and set aside by this Court, the cases of petitioners needs consideration. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners further submits that the