The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 7232 of 2023 P.O.-Charakmara, 1. Niranjan Kumar Roy, Aged About 38 years, son of-Nitya Nand Roy, R/o-Piprasol, P.O.-Karon, P.S.-Chitra, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 2. Anil Kumar, Aged About 41 years, son of-Bishnu Prasad Singh, R/o-Dhawabad, P.O.-Kukaraha, P.S.-Chitra, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 3. Pradip Kumar Rai, Aged About 44 years, son of Bhawadeo Pd. Rai, R/o-Parbad, P.S.-Sarath, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 4. Bomshanker Singh, Aged About 39 years, son of- Lakshminarayan Singh, R/o + P.O.-Amdiha P.S.-Chitra, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 5. Rajesh Kumar, Aged About 42 years, son of-Sri Baldeo Mahto, R/o-Mahaljori, P.O.-Baramsholi, P.S.-Sharath, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 6. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Aged About 40 years, son of-Naresh Pd. Singh, R/o+P.O.-Baramsholi, P.S.-Chitra, District- Deoghar, Jharkhand. 7. Shashikant Mishra, Aged About 44 years, son of-Srikant Mishra, R/o+ P.O.-Sarath, P.S.- , District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 8. Sanoj Kumar Singh, Aged About 45 years, son of-Sunil Kumar Singh, R/o-Noniyatanr, P.O.-Siktia, P.S.-Chitra, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 9. Basudeo Mandal, Aged About 53 years, son of-Moti Lal Mandal, P.S.-Sarath, District-Deoghar, R/o-Karma, Jharkhand. 10. Muchkund Prasad Singh, Aged About 46 years, son of- Parasnath Singh, R/o-Baski, P.O.-Kukraha, P.S.-Sarath, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. P.O.-Charakmara, Petitioners … … Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, at Project Bhawan Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, At+P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 4. Deputy Commissioner, Giridih, At+P.O & P.S.+ District- Giridih, Jharkhand. 5. Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh, At+P.O & P.S. + District- Ramgarh, Jharkhand. 6. Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, At+P.O. & P.S.+ District- Chatra, Jharkhand. 7. Deputy Commissioner, Kodarma, At+P.O. & P.S. + District- Kodarma, Jharkhand. 8. Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro, At+P.O. & P.S. + District- Bokaro, Jharkhand. 9. Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, At+P.O. & P.S.+ District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 10. Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar, At + P.O. & P.S. + District- Deoghar, Jharkhand. 11. Deputy Commissioner, Godda, At+ P.O. & P.S. + District- Jharkhand. 2 12. Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara, At+P.O & P.S.+ District-Jamtara, Jharkhand. 13. Deputy Commissioner, Pakur, At+P.O. & P.S. + District- Pakur, Jharkhand. 14. Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, At+P.O. & P.S. + District- Dumka, Jharkhand. 15. Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj, At+P.O. & P.S. + District- Sahebganj, Jharkhand. 16. District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh, At + P.O. & P.S. + District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 17. District Superintendent of Education, At+P.O & P.S. + District- Giridih, Jharkhand. 18. District Superintendent of Education, Ramgarh, At+P.O. & P.S. + District-Ramgarh, Jharkhand. 19. District Superintendent of Education, Chatra, At+P.O. & P.S. + District-Chatra, Jharkhand. 20. District Superintendent of Education, Kodarma, At+P.O & P.S. + District-Kodarma, Jharkhand. 21. District Superintendent of Education, Bokaro, At+P.O & P.S. + District-Bokaro, Jharkhand. 22. District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad, At+P.O & P.S. + District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 23. District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar, At+P.O. & P.S. + District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 24. District Superintendent of Education, Godda, At+P.O & P.S. + District-Godda, Jharkhand. 25. District Superintendent of Education, Jamtara, At+P.O & P.S. + District-Jamtara, Jharkhand. 26. District Superintendent of Education, Pakur, At+P.O & P.S. + District-Pakur, Jharkhand. 27. District Superintendent of Education, Dumka, At+P.O & P.S. + District-Dumka, Jharkhand. 28. District Superintendent of Education, Sahebganj, At+P.O & P.S. + … Respondents District-Sahebganj, Jharkhand. … --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY For the Petitioners For the Respondents
Legal Reasoning
batch of writ petitions were allowed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. State of Jharkhand and others) vide judgment dated 16.02.2022 against which the State of Jharkhand had filed appeals which have been decided vide judgment dated 15.09.2023 passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022 and other analogous cases. The learned counsel has also referred to order dated 01.02.2024 passed in W.P.(S) No. 468 of 2024 and submits that the same has
Arguments
--- : Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate : Mr. Ashish Kumar Shekhar, AC to SC (L&C)-II --- 04/06.02.2024 Learned counsel for the parties are present. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: (i) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/direction(s)/order(s)upon the Respondents concerned herein, to consider the candidature of the Petitioners for the post of Assistant Teacher, Class level 1-5 and appoint them on the aforesaid post, under the Respondents as, the persons who have been appointed has scored less merit points than the Petitioners and further, the case of the Petitioners is fully covered with the Order/Judgments passed in L.P.A. No.203/2022 and in analogous cases in terms of Order dated 15.09.2023, the Petitioners candidatures needs to be considered in the light of the aforesaid, Judgment by the Respondents. 3 (ii) For considering the candidature of the Petitioners in view of, the Order passed in L.P.A No. 203/2022, L.P.A. No.431/2022, L.P.A. No.482/2022, L.P.A. No,593/2022, L.P.A. No.610/2022, L.P.A. No.611/2022, L.P.A. No.613/2022, L.P.A. No.626/2022, L.P.A. No.628/2022, L.P.A. No.629/2022, W.P.(S) No.2049/2022 dated 15.09.2023, as the case of the Petitioners exactly stand on the same and similar footing.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are para teachers who had applied under para teacher category, but their candidature has not been considered in accordance with law and persons who had secured less marks than the petitioners in their category have been called for counseling. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that a
Decision
been disposed of in terms of the order passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022 and other analogous cases and therefore, this writ petition be also disposed of in terms of LPA No. 203 of 2022 and other analogous cases. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that similar order has also been passed in W.P.(S) No. 1471 of 2022 on 06.12.2023. 5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other hand, has submitted that arising out of the batch of writ petitions being W.P.(S) No. 2378 of 2019 and other analogous cases, another batch of appeals have been disposed of by a co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court on 31.01.2024 wherein certain more directions and observations have been made. He submits that the subsequent observations and directions be also incorporated while disposing of this case. The learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that pursuant to the orders passed by the Division Bench, one more counseling is to be held. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds 4 from the records that the petitioners claim to be para teachers who had applied under para teacher category and it is their case that persons who were below in merit list have been appointed. 7. No counter-affidavit as such has been filed in the present case, therefore, the respondents have not got any opportunity to respond to the averments made in the writ petition with regards to the aforesaid claim of the petitioners and in view of the fact that the counseling is likely to be held shortly in terms of the orders passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition and the aforesaid facts are required to be verified by the concerned respondents at the appropriate stage. The petitioners are seeking similar reliefs as has been granted by the order passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022 and other analogous cases arising out of W.P.(S) No. 2378 of 2019 and other analogous cases. 8. This Court finds that arising out of the same judgment dated 16.02.2022 passed in W.P.(S) No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. State of Jharkhand and others) another batch of Letters Patent Appeals being LPA No. 510 of 2023 and analogous cases have been disposed of vide judgment dated 31.01.2024 wherein certain more directions have been issued in connection with fresh counseling over and above what has been directed in the order passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022. The judgment in LPA No. 510 of 2023 and analogous cases has been passed on 31.01.2024 and the order in W.P.(S) No. 468 of 2024 has been passed on the next day i.e. on 01.02.2024 and therefore, the aforesaid judgment dated 31.01.2024 passed in LPA No. 510 of 2023 and analogous cases has not been placed before the writ Court while passing the order in W.P.(S) No. 468 of 2024 which has disposed of the case only in terms of the order passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022. 9. However, considering the facts of this case and the nature of reliefs sought for by the petitioners seeking disposal of the present case in terms of judgment dated 15.09.2023 passed in L.P.A. No.203 of 2022, this writ petition is fit to be disposed with the directions /observations made in judgment dated 15.09.2023 passed in L.P.A. No.203 of 2022 read with the directions /observations made in judgment dated 31.01.2024 passed in LPA No. 510 of 2023 and 5 analogous cases both arising out of the same impugned order though passed in two different batches of appeals arising out of the same batch of writ petitions. 10. LPA No. 510 of 2023 and analogous cases have been disposed of in terms of order passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022 and other analogous cases and additional clarifications/directions have been issued vide paragraph 33 of the judgment even though the Division Bench in LPA No. 510 of 2023 and analogous cases was not inclined to differ with the findings and directions issued vide order dated 15.09.2023 passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022 and other analogous cases. 11. Accordingly, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of order dated 15.09.2023 passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022 read with the order passed in LPA No. 510 of 2023 and analogous cases which was disposed of 31.01.2024. The findings and direction as contained in order dated 15.09.2023 passed in LPA No. 203 of 2022 are quoted 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 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 6 issued in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, which shall be not taken as precedent.” 12. Further clarification/direction issued in LPA No. 510 of 2023 and analogous cases as contained in paragraph 33 of the judgment is quoted as under: “33. Since it was the specific case of the writ petitioners that they were never called for counseling and that candidates securing less marks than the writ petitioners were called for counseling and were selected, it would be important to issue the following clarifications / directions in consonance with the specific stand of the various writ petitioners in the batch of cases involved in the impugned order though this Court is not inclined to differ with the findings and directions issued vide order dated 15.09.2023 passed in L.P.A. No. 203 of 2022:- (a) Only those candidates are to be called for counseling who have never been called for counseling earlier in one or the other district irrespective of the fact as to whether they had participated in the counseling or not. (b) To enable the candidate to participate in the fresh counseling the concerned respondent shall verify whether a candidate below in the merit list in the concerned district has been ultimately selected irrespective of the fact as to whether such a candidate had joined or not. If that be so, then only such candidate be permitted to appear in the fresh counseling. (c) There should be one counseling to be conducted simultaneously in all the districts as was directed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 19 of 2016 and other analogous cases which has been upheld in L.P.A. No. 168 of 2017.” 13. The respondents in the present case would be required to verify the factual aspects of the matter with regards to candidature and entitlement of the petitioners if the petitioners apply pursuant to fresh advertisement for counseling to be issued as directed by the Division Bench in the aforesaid two batch cases read together. 14. This writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 15. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed. Pankaj/Saurav (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)