The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 1804 of 2024 ---------- 1. Jitendra Kumar Singh 2. Bhola Nath 3. Padma Rani Mitra 4. Ravindra Birua 5. Nitin Kumar 6. Sarita Sahu 7. Sangita Sahu 8. Priti Kumari 9. Md. Iftikhar Alam 10. Ghulam Jeelani 11. Farhana Anjum 12. Himanshu Shekhar Yadav 13. Rajeev Ranjan 14. Santosh Kumar 15. Rajesh Ranjan 16. Vikash Kumar Gupta 17. Shiv Shankar 18. Priyanka Singh 19. Prabhash Jha 20. Pawan Kumar Pathak 21. Meenakshi Dutta 22. Amit Kumar Thakur 23. Anuj Kumar Roy 24. Md. Anish Ansari 25. Hemant Kumar 26. Vijay Kumar Singh 27. Chandra Mani 28. Saket Kumar 29. Archana Singh @ Archana Choudhary 30. Manoj Kumar 31. Jagrity Ranjan Jolly 32. Suresh Yadav 33. Ajit Kumar Verma 34. Surendra Hansda 35. Umesh Kumar ………… Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi & Ors. ………… Respondents 1. Love Kumar Dutta 2. Kush Kumar Dutta 3. Suresh Prasad 4. Prayag Kumar With W.P.(S). No. 1814 of 2024 1 5. Gyanchand Prasad 6. Damodar Ghosh 7. Basudev Mondal 8. Md. Mukhtar Ansari 9. Ranjan Kumar 10. Santosh Kumar Sinha 11. Shyamal Kumar Kapuri 12. Krishna Charan Maji 13. Paritosh Kumar Maji 14. Shyam Sunder Ghosh 15. Manoranjan Mondal 16. Goutam Kumar Mondal 17. Rameshwar Ram 18. Prem Kumar Ray 19. Arjun Pandit 20. Anant Kumar Singh 21. Dhananjay Kumar Singh 22. Pradip Kumar Rao 23. Dhirendra Kumar Rao 24. Birendra Kumar Sharma 25. Raj Kishor Tiwari 26. Gangadhar Pandit 27. Ashim Kumar Chakrabarty 28. Kalpana Bhandari 29. Mohan Kumar Pandit 30. Rajkishor Kumar 31. Pradeep Kumar 32. Vijay Rajak 33. Punitam Kumar 34. Utpal Chakrabarti 35. Md. Azad Ansari 36. Chandradeo Pandit 37. Gayatri Paul 38. Amod Kumar Ram 39. Janki Roy ………… Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi & Ors. ………… Respondents With W.P.(S). No. 1803 of 2024 1. Preety Rani 2. Neeraj Kumar Alok 3. Santosh Kumar 4. Sanjay Kumar Singh 5. Gauri Kachchap 6. Anita Surin 7. Kumari Mamata 8. Gaurav Anand 2 9. Shashi Kala Kumari 10. Mary Regina Aind 11. Rashmi Kumari 12. Priyanka Kumari 13. Sudhan Kumari 14. Falindra Ohdar 15. Priya Gupta 16. Jyoti Kumari 17. Renuka Kumari 18. Arbind Kumar Gupta 19. Vivek Kumar 20. Man Mohan Sahu 21. Satyendra Prasad 22. Minu Baraik 23. Dinesh Kumar Pandey 24. Sunil Pandit 25. Keshav Das 26. Poonam Kumari 27. Pratima Kerketta 28. Pratima Bela Kujur 29. Tabassum Khatoon 30. Rashmi Kerketta 31. Ruby Kerketta 32. Suresh Mahto 33. Ranjit Kumar Singh 34. Punam Sahu 35. Ajay Kumar Ram 36. Bhairavi Kumari Mahto 37. Madhu Ranjan 38. Ribha Kumari 39. Vikash Prasad 40. Avinash Kumar Sinha 41. Vikash Chandra Mishra 42. Anjani Kumar Singh 43. Parvin Kumar Singh 44. Niraj Kumar 45. Shiv Dev Singh 46. Renuka Barla 47. Mary Manjula Barla 48. Manjula Kongari 49. Tabita Kula 50. Noorjehan Topno 51. Kavita Devi 52. Samar Prasad 53. Anand Kumar Kashyap …………. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi & Ors. …………. Respondents 3 With W.P.(S). No. 1867 of 2024 1. Shilpi Kumari 2. Anshu Kiran Barla 3. Rajdeo Prasad Mahto 4. Smita Sinha 5. Ananta Kumari 6. Anita Kumari 7. Manju Lakra 8. Arvind Kumar 9. Sarita Kumari 10. Ram Bachchan 11. Ramashankar Prasad Jaiswal 12. Nageshwari Kumari 13. Sangeeta Kumari 14. Md. Sajid 15. Pankaj Kumar 16. Rita Kumari Baraik 17. Parmeshwari Kumari 18. Indu Suchita Dangwar 19. Baijnath Kumar …………. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi & Ors. …………. Respondents With W.P.(S). No. 1868 of 2024 1. Sandeep Kumar Mahto 2. Sharan Kumar Rajak 3. Nandita Murmu 4. Stenshila Soren 5. Bulbul Das 6. Pappu Kumar Das 7. Pappu Yadav 8. Sangita Kumari 9. Elizabeth Tudu 10. Rohit Kumar Yadav 11. Veena Kumari 12. Khelan Kumar Mandal 13. Paritosh Kumar 14. Mukesh Kumar Ray 15. Punam Singh 16. Seema Kumari …………… Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi & Ors. ………… Respondents 4 CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK For the Petitioners For the Respondents
Legal Reasoning
: M/s. Rahul Ranjan, Lalit Kr. Singh, Ashit Kumar, Hritik Neeraj, Tapan Kumar Mishra, Shubham Mishra, Advocates : Mr. Amit Kumar, SC(M)-II Mr. Prabhat Kumar, SC-II Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, SC-IV Mr. Faisal Alam, AC to SC(M)-III Ms. Divya, AC to SC-III Ms. Surbhi, AC to SC-II 02/ 16.04.2024 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they have already ---------- removed the defects, as pointed-out by the Office. 2. Heard the parties. 3. Since, the issues involved in all these writ petitions are similar and identical and as such they have been tagged together and are being
Decision
disposed of by this common order. 4. 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 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. 5. 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: “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 the concerned Districts, as early as possible, of 5 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 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.” thereafter, 6. 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 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 6 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 facts and issued circumstances of the case, which shall be not taken as precedent.” in peculiar 7. 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. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has no objection to the same. 9. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, these writ petitions are 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. 10. 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. 7 11. Let it be made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the cases. 12. With these observations and directions, all these writ petitions stand disposed of. Kunal (Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) 8