The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 1617 of 2024 ---------- 1.Kiran Kumari 2.Digamber Yadav 3.Meena Kumari 4.Satyam Mishra 5.Santosh Kumar Rawani 6.Laldeep Yadav 7.Tikendra Yadav 8.Ajay Kumar Chowdhary 9.Phani Bhusan Rajwar 10.Jihur Chandra Mahto 11.Chandi Charan Majhi 12.Kailash Chandra Mahato 13.Duresh Chandra Mahato 14.Kishor Kumar Mahato 15.Jagadish Chandra Mahato 16.Baidya Nath Modak 17.Taleshwar Prasad 18.Arti Mehta 19.Lilawati Kumari 20.Tapeshwar Das 21.Umesh Prasad Gupta 22.Baleshwar Kumar Mahto 23.Khirodhar Mahto 24.Santosh Kumar 25.Rajesh Mahto 26.Suresh Kumar Patel 27.Ramanand Prasad Singh 28.Lalita Kumari @ Lalita Devi 29.Chandra Prakash Mehta 30.Naresh Kumar Yadav 31.Shivdayal Kumar Dangi 32.Sridhar Hembram 33.Md. Ashraf Ali Ansari 34.Md. Sahid Ansari 35.Umesh Ravidas 36.Suresh Kumar Rabi Das 37.Raj Kumar Mahto 38.Raj Kumar 39.Muneshwar Prasad ………. Petitioners Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand 2.The Secretary, School Education and Literacy Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, MDI Building, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand 3.The Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, MDI Building, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand -1-
Legal Reasoning
4.The District Superintendent of Education, Chatra, Block Campus, District-Chatra, Jharkhand 5.The District Superintendent of Education, District Board Chowk, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand 6.The District Superintendent of Education, Remgarh, Office ‘B’ Block, New Samaharnalay Bhawan at Chhatarmandu, Dist.-Ramgarh, Jharkhand 7.The District Superintendent of Education, Samaharnalay Bhawan, Koderma, Dist.-Koderma, Jharkhand 8.The District Superintendent of Education, Giridih, Old Jail Campus near Jhanda Maidan, Dist.-Giridih, Jharkhand 9.The District Superintendent of Education, Campus Middle School SBS, Chas, Bye Pass Road, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand 10.The District Superintendent of Education, Misrit Bhawan (Basement), Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand 11.The District Superintendent of Education, Dumka, Zila Parishad Bhawan, Dumka, Dist.-Dumka 12.The District Superintendent of Education, Middle School, Old Meena Bazar Campus, Dist.-Deoghar, Jharkhand 13.The District Superintendent of Education, Jamtara, Combined Building, Block-C, Sri Rampur, Dist.-Jamtara, Jharkhand 14.The District Superintendent of Education, First Floor of Information & Public Affair Building, in front of Mela Maidan, Dist.-Godda, Jharkhand 15.The District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj, Middle School (Police line campus), District-Sahibganj, Jharkhand 16.The District Superintendent of Education, Pakur, Court campus, District- Pakur, Jharkhand 17.The District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand 18.The District Superintendent of Education Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum, Jharkhand 19.The District Superintendent of Education, Saraikela-Kharsawan at Gaurang Dih, District-Saraikela-Kharsawan, Jharkhand 20.The District Superintendent of Education, Palamau, Dist.-Palamau, Jharkhand 21.The District Superintendent of Education Garhwa, Dist.-Garhwa, Jharkhand 22.The District Superintendent of Education, Latehar, Dist.-Latehar, ………. Respondents Jharkhnad CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK ---------- For the Petitioners For the Respondents 02/ 09.04.2024 Heard the parties.
Legal Reasoning
----------- : Mr. Baleshwar Yadav, Advocate : Mr. Suresh Kumar, SC (L&C)-II ---------- 2. The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to allow them to participate in the counselling process in the respective districts for which they have -2- applied for consideration of their candidatures under Para/ Non-Para categories for remaining vacancies of Intermediate Trained Teachers for Classes 1 to 5 / 6 to 8 and if the petitioners are found eligible, they may be suitably appointed as they have already applied against the vacancies in different districts in the year 2015 and the candidates having lesser marks than the petitioners have been called and allowed to participate in the counselling. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the 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: shall approach petitioners “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 Deputy The 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.” 4. 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 passed by learned Single Judge needs no interference by this Court and is required to be complied with at an -3- 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 last selected candidates in the merit list in the respective districts. than the 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 directions have been issued in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, which shall be not taken as precedent.” 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that since similar issue has already been decided by this Court, present petitioners are also entitled 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. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has no objection to the same. 7. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned Counsel for the
Decision
parties, 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 -4- 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. 8. 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. 9. Let it be made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the case. 10. With these observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. Rohit- (Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) -5-