Jharkhand High Court
Fanindra Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 23 April, 2024
Author: S.N. Pathak
Bench: S.N.Pathak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S). No. 1621 of 2024
----------
Fanindra Mandal ............ Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Raj Bhasa & Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
4. The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
5. The Director, Primary Education (Directorate of Education), School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
6. The Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro
7. The District Superintendent of Education, Bokaro.
8. The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad.
9. The District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad.
10.The Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar.
11.The District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar.
............ Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK
For the Petitioners : Mr. Mukesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Ankit Apurva, Advocate
For the State : Mr. K.K. Singh, AC to SC-V
----------
03/ 23.04.2024 Heard the parties.
2. Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for direction upon the respondents to allow him to participate in the counselling process for appointment to the post of Graduate Trained Teachers for Class-VI to VIII as well as for Class-I to V in different districts of Jharkhand in light of order passed in W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and analogous cases which has been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in LPA No. 203 of 2022
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of the Court towards order dated 10.05.2022, passed by this Court in W.P.(S). No. 3115 of 2015 and submits that by the said order, the Hon'ble Court has been pleased to quash and set aside the notification dated 26.02.2015 and as such, the issue is now no more res-integra. Learned counsel further argues that while disposing the said writ petition, 1 the Division Bench has clearly observed that the notification dated 26.02.2015, issued by the State cannot be given retrospective effect and the same will operate prospectively. Learned counsel submits that since the cases of petitioners for appointment to the post of Teachers for Class- VI to VIII as well as for Class-I to V have been turned down on the sole ground that certificates issued by the Deoghar Hindi Vidyapith is not valid and as the said notification of the State has been quashed and set aside by this Court, the case of petitioner needs consideration.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further 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 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."
5. 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:
2"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 issued in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, which shall be not taken as precedent."
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since similar issue has already been decided by this Court and further, in view order passed by this Court in W.P.(S). No. 3115 of 2015 the notification dated 26.02.2015, issued by the Principal Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, by 3 which the cases of petitioner have been turned down, has already been quashed and set aside, present petitioner is 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.
7. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has no objection to the same.
8. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and in view of the fact that earlier notification of the State regarding validity of degree of Deoghar Hindi Vidyapith has already been quashed and set aside, 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 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 case of the present petitioner is 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 petitioner is also entitled for the same benefits.
9. 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.
10. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.
(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) Kunal 4