The High Court · 2024
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 6403 of 2023 1. Sikha Bharadwaz, wife of Ashutosh Kumar, aged about 45 years, R/OLila place lake road, Noora, P.O. and P.S. Hazaribag, District Hazaribagh 2. Kriti Sarita Minz, aged about 44 years, W/o Pradip Pratap Tirkey, R/O Peace Road, Lalpur, P.O. and P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi 3. Aisha Khatoon, wife of Md. Jamil aged about 42 years, R/o Dhurka, Pobra, P.O. and P.S. Katkam Sandi, District Hazaribagh
Legal Reasoning
4. Jyoti Kumari, wife of Sri Krishan Kumar, aged about 40 years, R/o Sardar Chowk, P.O. and P.S. Hazaribag, District Hazaribagh Versus … … Petitioners 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Woman and Child Development Department, Project Building, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi 3. Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribag, P.O. and P.S. Hazaribag, District Hazaribag 4. Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh, P.O. and P.S. Ramgarh, District Ramgarh 5. Deputy Development Commissioner, Ramgarh, P.O. and P.S. Ramgarh, District Ramgarh 6. District Welfare Officer, Ramgarh, P.O. and P.S. Ramgarh, Dist. Ramgarh 7. Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission having office Kalinagar, Chaibagan, Namkom, P.O. and P.S. Namkom, District Ranchi 8. Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission having office Kalinagar, Chaibagan, Namkom, P.O. and P.S. Namkom, District Ranchi … … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioners For the JSSC For the State 04/8th February 2024 --- : Mr. Vishal Kr. Tiwari, Advocate : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate : Mr. Gaurav Abhishek, Advocate --- 1. 2. Learned counsel for the parties are present. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: - “(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) or a writ in nature of certiorari for quashing the Advertisement no. 14/2023 published by the respondent Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission. (ii) To be hold and declare regularized/absorb on the post of lady supervisor. that petitioners should be And/Or (ii) During the pendency of this writ petition advertisement no. 14/2023 be kept in abeyance. 2 And/Or (iv) For issuance of any such writ(s)/Order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court may fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and for doing conscionable justice to the petitioner.” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that essentially the matter relates to legitimate expectation of the petitioners, inasmuch as, the petitioners have been working on contractual basis as lady supervisor under Integrated Child Development Scheme in the district of Hazaribagh since the year 2005, but in the Advertisement No. 14 of 2023 for the post of lady supervisor there is no provision of any reservation or age relaxation for those who have been working for such a long time. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other hand, has submitted that the terms and conditions of Advertisement No. 14/2023 are essentially a matter of policy and the petitioners had filed a writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 3082 of 2021 seeking regularization and the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court on 15.01.2024 enabling the petitioners to approach the concerned authorities by filing representation for redressal of their grievances. The learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that if the petitioners are entitled for any relief they shall get the same by virtue of the order passed in W.P. (S) No. 3082 of 2021. 5. The learned counsel has also submitted that as per paragraph no.13 of the writ petition, there was an advertisement for appointment way back in the year 2014 also and the petitioners could have very well participated in the said process and, therefore, no relief be granted to the petitioners in the present writ petition. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of relief prayed for in the present writ petition, this Court is of the considered view that the terms and conditions of the advertisement impugned are essentially a matter of policy and accordingly, this Court is not inclined to quash the same and grant the relief as prayed for by the petitioners in paragraph
Decision
1(i) of the writ petition. 7. So far as the prayer made in paragraph 1(ii) is concerned, the petitioners had already filed a writ petition before this Court being W.P.(S) No. 3082 of 2021 which was disposed of on 15.01.2024 by making certain observations and directions for consideration of representation. Accordingly, no relief can be granted for the same purpose against the prayer made in paragraph 1(ii) of the 3 writ petition. Paragraph 43 of the order passed in W.P. (S) No. 3082 of 2021 is quoted as under: - “43. In the aforesaid circumstances, individual petitioners are directed to approach the respective Secretaries of the Department concerned by filing their respective representations along with a copy of this order and writ petition as well as other documents, if so required, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon receipt of the same, the Department concerned shall take a conscious decision within a period of three months thereafter. If the Department concerned is unable to take a decision, the same shall be referred to the Chief Secretary of the State after assigning reason for not coming to a conclusion. The Chief Secretary of the State upon receipt of such recommendation from the Department concerned, shall constitute a High Powered Committee comprising of the Heads of the Departments/ Secretaries including the experts and other members, who are found appropriate in the interest of Committee for taking a final decision. The final decision shall be taken by the Committee so constituted within a further period of four months. The Committee shall examine individual cases and take a decision regarding regularization in 57 view of the guidelines framed by the State as per the direction of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Narendra Kumar Tiwari (supra). If the Committee fails to take a unanimous decision on the representations of the individual employees, the same shall be disposed of with a cogent and valid reasoned order, in accordance with law. Thereafter, the parties if aggrieved by the said reasoned order are at liberty to approach this Court for redressal of their grievances. The same exercise as stated above shall be undertaken by the Union of India in consultation with the Government of Jharkhand for redressal of the grievances of the petitioners concerned for regularization.” 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, the present writ petition is hereby dismissed. 9. However, dismissal of this writ petition will not be an impediment in the way of the petitioners if the petitioners are found entitled for any relief by virtue of the writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 3082 of 2021 for which they have been directed to file representation. 10. Pending I.A., if any, is closed. Saurav (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)