The High Court · 2025
Case Details
2025:JHHC:34619 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1492 of 2017 1. Bhagirathi Paul, son of Late Ajit Kumar Pal, resident of village Karaduba, P.O. Karaduba, P.S. Ghatsila, District East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. 2. Shashi Kant Roy, son of Late Janardan Roy, resident of village Gopalpur, P.O. Gopalpur, P.S. Ghatsila, District East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. 3. Ramvinay Sharma, son of Shri Tapeshwar Singh, resident of 23/E Road, Adarsh Nagar, P.O. & P.S. Baridih, District East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. 4. Suresh Kumar Dutta, son of Late Laxminarayan Dutta, resident of Jemco Basti, Road No.2, P.O. Telco Works, P.S. Telco, District East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. 5. Arati Shit, daughter of Late Bhudeo Chandra Shit, resident of Karaduba, P.O. Karaduba, P.S. Ghatsila, District East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. 6. Shrilekha Karn wife of Jagdeep Prasad, resident of House No. 56-B, Mandir Path Link, Bhatia Basti, P.O. & P.S. Kadma, District East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. ... … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Personal Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O & P.S.- Dhurwa, Distict- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. The Deputy Secretary, Personal Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O & P.S- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Jamshedpur, P.O & P.S- Bistupur, District- East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, Jharkhand. 5. The Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar through its Registrar at P.O., P.S. & District Deoghar. ... … Respondent(s)
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Shirsh Mazumdar, AC to SC-II -------- Order No. 07/Dated: 19th November 2025 Defects pointed out by the Registry are hereby ignored. 2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for 1 2025:JHHC:34619
Decision
hearing and is being disposed of today itself. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the respective sides. 4. The petitioners in this writ application have prayed for setting aside the letter No. 1863 dated 26.02.2015 issued by the respondent No. 2 by which the matriculation, intermediate and graduation degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar in relation to appointment and promotion has been invalidated. Further prayer has been made for quashing of the letter dated 01.06.2015 issued by the respondent No. 2; whereby it has been clarified that the direction contained in letter dated 26.02.2015 in relation to the invalidation of degree with effect from 26.06.2014 shall have retrospective effect. The petitioners have further prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider and promote the petitioners in appropriate Grade of Pay under the 1993 Rules considering the fact that the petitioners have obtained the requisite qualification, training and experience for being promoted on higher grades; more so, when the juniors have already been promoted. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that so far as the letter No. 1863 dated 26.02.2015 is concerned, the same was under consideration by the Division Bench in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 and other analogous cases and it has been held that the degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar are valid up to 26.02.2015. He further submits that since the issue has already been settled by the Division Bench of this Court, it is now for the respondent authorities to consider the claim of promotion of the petitioners in terms of the 1993 Rules. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents admits the fact that the issue w.r.t. validity of the degree of Hidi Vidyapith up to 26.02.2015 has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court. 7. From record it appears that the petitioners were appointed as 2 2025:JHHC:34619 Assistant Teachers in different schools in the State of Jharkhand and they have acquired higher qualification of Sahitya Alankar from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar, the details of which have already been mentioned in this writ application. However, by virtue of letter No. 1863 dated 26.02.2015, the respondent authorities have decided to invalidate the matriculation, intermediate and graduation degrees issued by the Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar in relation to appointment and promotion and the resolution of the Government dated 03.11.2003 has been withdrawn. As a consequence to the said letter, the claim and entitlement of the petitioners for promotion on a higher grade has not been done and their names have also not been included in the gradation list. 8. The issue with respect to retrospectivity of the operation of the certificates awarded by Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar was under consideration by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 wherein it has been held as follows:- “19. This Court, applying the ratio about retrospective applicability of executive instruction as has been settled in the judgment quoted hereinabove, is of the considered view that the decision of not providing validity to the degree issued by the Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar w.e.f. 26.06.2014 as per decision contained in communication dated 26.02.2015 cannot be allowed to make it effective w.e.f. 26.06.2014 i.e., with retrospective effect rather it will be held to be prospective i.e. after 26.02.2015 as such the certificate issued by Hindi Vidyapith up-to 26.02.2015 is held to be valid. 23. The degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar are held to be valid up-to 26.02.2015.” 9. It has thus been held that the degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar are valid up to 26.02.2015. Therefore, the primary prayer of the petitioners has already been settled as noted above by virtue of the order passed by the Division Bench in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015. However, the issue with respect to inclusion of their names in the gradation list and promotion and the consequent grievances still remains to be addressed. 10. Accordingly, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the respective petitioners to prefer individual representation before the 4th Respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If such representation(s) are preferred, the 3 2025:JHHC:34619 Respondent No. 4 shall dispose it off in accordance with law by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of such representation(s). 11. It goes without saying that if the claim of the petitioner(s) is/are found to be admissible, necessary steps for redressing the grievance of the petitioner(s) shall be taken expeditiously. 12. Accordingly, this writ application stands disposed of with the aforementioned observations. 13. Pending I.A., if any, also stand disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 19th November, 2025 Amit Uploaded on 04/12/2025 4