Jharkhand High Court
Brajesh Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 9 May, 2022
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (S) No. 1993 of 2019
1. Brajesh Kumar, S/o of Sri Lakhan Yadav, R/o Village-Kharanti,
P.O.-Gaoshaibaliya, P.S.-Barkagaon, Dist.-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
2. Narayan Chandra Mandal, R/o Village-Bara Baghmara, P.O-
Bagsuma, P.S.-Govindpur, Dist.-Dhanbad, Jharkhand
3. Shiv Ram Mandal, R/o Village-Mohubani, P.O.-Ambona, P.S.-
Govindpur, Dist.-Dhanbad, Jharkhand
4. Dinesh Kumar Singh, R/o Village-Pandeypura Kalan, P.O.-
Kandaber, P.S.-Keredari, Dist.-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
5. Binod Kumar Thakur, R/o Village-Bariyatu, P.O-Kandaber, P.S.-
Keredari, Dist.-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
6. Ashok Kumar Singh, R/o Village-Urimari, P.O. & P.S.-Barkagaon,
Dist.-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
7. Vinod Kumar, R/o Village-Garri Kalan, P.O & P.S.-Gari Kalan,
Dist.-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
8. Dipak Kumar Bhandary, R/o Village-Gargora, P.O.-Bardohi, P.S.-
Govindpur, Dist.-Dhanbad, Jharkhand
9. Hemant Kumar Mandal, R/o Village-Bhangabazar, P.O-
Narayanpur, P.S.-Pindrajora, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand
10.Prakash Mahatha, R/o Village-Telidih Road, Near Harimandir,
P.O. & P.S.-Chas, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand
11.Kalyan Sundram, S/o Jaydev Choudhary, R/o Village-
Khamarbendi, P.O. Khamarbendi, P.S.-Chas, Dist.-Bokaro,
Jharkhand
12.Manoj Kumar Sarak, S/o Lakhshmi Kant Sarak, R/o Village-Belut,
P.O.-Brahman Dwarika, P.S.-Chas, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand
13.Shailesh Kumar Singh, S/o Arun Singh, R/o Village-Chakulia,
P.O-Kashijharia, P.S.-Pndarjora, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand
14.Phani Bhushan Mahato, S/o Jagdish Mahato, R/o Village-
Damumura, P.O.-Birajpur, P.S.-Barwadda, Dist.-Dhanbad,
Jharkhand
15.Vijay Kumar Singh, S/o Pashuram Singh, R/o Village-Bishupur,
P.O.-Bishupur, P.S.-Pirtand, Dist.-Giridih, Jharkhand
16.Dinesh Kumar, S/o Niwaran Prasad, R/o Village-Thari, P.O.-
Tasaria, P.S.-Masaliya, Dist.-Dumka, Jharkhand
17.Bharat Mandal, S/o Gunadhar Mandal, R/o Village-Thari, P.O.-
Tasariya, P.S.-Masaliya, Dist.-Dumka, Jharkhand
18.Binod Bihari Saw, S/o Doman Mahato, R/o Village-Gorga, P.O.-
Tilaiya, P.S.-Tilaiya, Dist.-Dhanbad, Jharkhand
19.Ramchandra Ram, S/o Muni Ram, R/o Village-Matlong, P.O.-
Matlong, P.S.-Manika, Dist.-Latehar, Jharkhand
20.Paras Nath Yadav, S/o Sri Mandil Khirhar, R/o Village-Bagjhopa,
P.O.-Bagjhopa, P.S. Bagjhopa, Dist.-Dumka, Jharkhand
21.Md. Anwar Ansari, S/o Md. Saraj Ansari, R/o Village-Bario More,
P.O.- Sarkadih, P.S.-Govindpur, Dist.-Dhanbad, Jharkhand
22.Jeevadhan Mahto, S/o Muneshwar Mahto, R/o Village-Toyar,
P.O.-Toyar, P.S.-Gola, Dist.-Ramgarh, Jharkhand
23.Rajesh Kumar, R/o Village-Garrikalan, P.O.-Garrikalan, P.S.-
Keredari, Dist.-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ... ... Petitioners
2
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, P.O and P.S.-
Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand
3. The Principal Secretary, Department of personnel, Raj Bhasa &
Administrative Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Project
Bhawan, P.O and P.S.-Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand
4. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development
Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O and
P.S.-Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand
5. The Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development
Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O and
P.S.-Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand
6. The Director, Jharkhand Education Project Council Project New
Co-Operative Building Shyamli, P.O and P.S.-Doranda, Dist.-
Ranchi, Jharkhand
7. The Secretary, Ministry of Education, Govt. of India, New Delhi,
P.O & P.S.-New Delhi
8. The Deputy Commissioner Hazaribagh, P.O and P.S.-Hazaribagh,
Dist.-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
9. The Deputy Superintendent Education, Hazaribagh, P.O & P.S.-
Hazaribagh, Dist.-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
10.The Deputy Commissioner Giridih, P.O and P.S.-Giridih, Dist.-
Giridih, Jharkhand
11.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Giridih P.O and P.S.-
Giridih, Dist.-Giridih, Jharkhand
12.The Deputy Commissioner Dhanbad, P.O and P.S.-Dhanbad, Dist.-
Dhanbad, Jharkhand
13.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Dhanbad P.O and P.S.-
Dhanbad, Dist.-Dhanbad, Jharkahnd
14.The Deputy Commissioner Chatra, P.O and P.S.-Chatra, Dist.-
Chatra, Jharkhand
15.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Chatra P.O and P.S.-
Chatra, Dist.-Chatra, Jharkhand
16.The Deputy Commissioner Bokaro, P.O and P.S.-Bokaro, Dist.-
Bokaro, Jharkhand
17.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Bokaro, P.O and P.S.-
Bokaro, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand
18.The Deputy Commissioner Deoghar, P.O and P.S.-Deoghar, Dist.-
Deoghar, Jharkhand
19.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Deoghar, P.O and P.S.-
Deoghar, Dist.-Deoghar, Jharkhand
20.The Deputy Commissioner Ramgarh, P.O and P.S.-Ramgarh,
Dist.-Ramgarh, Jharkhand
21.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Ramgarh, P.O and P.S.
Ramgarh, Dist.-Ramgarh, Jharkhand
22.The Deputy Commissioner Jamtara, P.O and P.S.-Jamtara, Dist.
Jamtara, Jharkhand
23.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Jamtara, P.O and P.S.-
Jamtara, Dist. Jamtara, Jharkhand
24.The Deputy Commissioner Koderma, P.O and P.S.-Koderma,
Dist.-Koderma, Jharkhand
3
25.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Koderma, P.O and P.S.-
Koderma, Dist.-Koderma, Jharkhand
26.The Deputy Commissioner Sahebganj, P.O and P.S.-Sahebganj,
Dist.-Sahebgang, Jharkhand
27.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Sahebganj, P.O and P.S.-
Sahebganj, Dist.-Sahebgang, Jharkhand
28.The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, P.O and P.S.-Dumka, Dist.-
Dumka, Jharkhand
29.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Dumka, P.O and P.S.-
Dumka, Dist.-Dumka, Jharkhand
30.The Deputy Commissioner Godda, P.O and P.S.-Godda, Dist.-
Godda, Jharkhand
31.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Godda P.O and P.S.-
Godda, Dist.-Godda, Jharkhand
32.The Deputy Commissioner Pakur, P.O and P.S.-Pakur, Dist.-Pakur,
Jharkhand
33.The Deputy Superintendent Education, Pakur, P.O and P.S.-Pakur,
Dist.-Pakur, Jharkhand ... ... Respondents
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioners : Mr. Shadab Bin Haque, Advocate : Mr. Devshri Mandal, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate : Mr. S. Ahmed, Advocate Through Video Conferencing 13/09.05.2022
1. Heard Mr. Shadab Bin Haque, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners along with Mr. Devshri Mandal, Advocate.
2. Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State of Jharkhand.
3. Heard Mr. Krishna Murari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.-6.
4. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: -
"(a) For issuance of appropriate direction upon the respondent authorities to invite the petitioners for counseling for their appointment on the post of Assistant Teachers in their respective districts while considering: -
i. The Petitioners are para teachers.
ii. The petitioners had submitted their application against quota of vacancy earmarked for para-category teachers has indicated in Jharkhand Primary School Teachers appointment rules 2012 (amended time to time) and the advertisement issue by different district for making appointment on the post of Assistant Teachers. iii. Whereas several other para-teachers who had applied in non-para category and who have not allow to participate 4 in counseling despite their name figured in the merit list had approached the Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court and the Hon'ble Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 235/2004 and W.P.(S) No. 6100/2003 hold that the para-teachers who have applied in non para category is entitled for their counseling and thus directed the concerned authority to complete the process of their counseling. iv. The petitioners who on account of specific clause in the rules and advertisement had confined their applications only in para category due to which the para-teacher who applied in non-para category and secured lesser mark than the petitioners are being invited for fresh counseling as per the order of the Hon'ble Court and going to be appointed.
(b) For issuance of appropriate direction upon the respondent authorities showing them cause as to why the respondents after order of the Hon'ble Division Bench have not come out with any device to redress the bonafide grievance of the petitioners who follow the rules/terms of the advertisement but now being made to suffer as those para-teachers with lesser marks are going to be appointed through fresh counseling in non-para category.
(c ) To hold and declare that the petitioners who had applied in para category are also entitled for the appointment on the post of Assistant Teachers despite they applied only in para-category in as much as, the petitioner also fulfils all the criteria laid down under the Jharkhand Primary School Teachers Appointment Rules 2012 (as amended upto date) but shockingly those para- teachers having applied a non-para category is going to be appointed despite securing lesser marks then those para teachers who strictly as per rules/advertisements confined their candidature in para category.
And/Or Pass such other order/orders as your lordships may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is not in dispute that the petitioners had applied under Para Teacher Category, but ultimately they were not selected. The learned counsel submits that a judgment has been passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 2378/2019 for enabling the various other persons to participate in the counseling and accordingly, similar order may be passed in this regard. The learned counsel has submitted that the case of the petitioners is fully covered by order passed in W.P.(S) No. 2378/2019.
6. During the course of hearing, a specific query was put by this Court to the learned counsel for the petitioners as to whether any of 5 the persons in the category, in which the petitioners had applied, were called for counseling who had less mark than the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has fairly submitted that there is no such ground taken by the petitioners in the present writ petition.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents have opposed the prayer made by the petitioners and have submitted that there is no merit in the present writ petition.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds that in W.P.(S) No. 2378/2019 and other analogous cases, it was categorically recorded that the petitioners of the said case were the persons who had obtained more marks than the candidates whose names figured in the selection list, but were never called for counseling and it was held that such petitioners were entitled to be considered for appointment, if the vacancies were still there and not advertised as yet.
The petitioners of W.P.(S) No. 2378/2019 were directed to be called for one time counseling by way of last opportunity considering the fact that it was the specific case of the petitioners in W.P. (S) No. 2378/2019 and other analogous cases that persons having less marks than the petitioners of the said cases were included in the counseling list. It was also observed that the ambiguity, as to whether para teachers can apply under non-para category, has already been set at rest in L.P.A. No. 186/2017.
9. It is not in dispute in the present case that the petitioners, who are para-teachers, had applied under the para-teacher category and no such case has been made out by the petitioners that the persons who have less marks in their category were called for counseling. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the present case is not covered by the judgment passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 2378/2019 (Paras Nath Mandal vs. The State of Jharkhand & Others) and other analogous cases. This Court is also of the considered view that the case of the present petitioners is also not covered by the judgment passed in L.P.A. No. 186/2017 (Pawan Singh Choudhary and Others vs. The State of Jharkhand & Others) 6 where the para-teachers had applied under non-para category and were not called for counseling only for the reason that they being para teachers could not have applied under non para category. The said reason was held to be bad in law. Para 3 and 4 of the aforesaid judgment is quoted as under: -
"3. It appears that appellants (original petitioners) are working as Para Teachers, but, they have not applied under the reserved category meant for para teachers. They have applied under non-Para Teachers category candidate for the districts they have been selected. Thus, the districts they have applied for the post of Assistant Teachers and the districts for which they have been selected are the districts in which they have applied for under non-Para Teacher category.
4. It appears from the arguments canvassed by the State of Jharkhand that as the original petitioners are working as Para Teachers they must apply or they shall be deemed to have applied, under reserved category quota for Para Teachers. This argument cannot be accepted for the following reasons:
(a) There is no rule, regulation or Government Circular or Government Policy that those candidates, who are already working as Para Teachers, must apply under the reserved category meant for para teachers.
(b) There is no such condition attached with the public advertisement in question that those candidates, who are working as Para Teachers, must apply for the reserved category seats meant for Para Teachers.
(c) There is no circular issued by the Respondent State of Jharkhand that those who are working as Para Teachers and applying for the post of Assistant Teachers must apply as reserved category of Para Teachers.
(d) On the contrary, it depends upon the confidence of the candidate to apply under reserved category or not to apply under the reserved category and there is no bar for such candidates that they cannot apply under the General category, which is meant for non-Para Teachers.
(e) Thus, it appears that those, who have applied for a particular district as non-Para Teacher category candidate, they are confident enough not take advantage of the age relaxation or any other type of relaxation meant for the Para Teachers given by the Government.
(f) Thus, the appellants (original petitioners of both the writ petitioners) were confident enough to have applied without taking any relaxation meant for Para Teachers and they have been selected for those districts for which they have applied.
Even otherwise also, they have cleared Teachers Eligibility Test and they are seeking employment on the basis of their own merit without availing relaxation or concession of the quota meant for Para Teachers. Thus, it appears that the original petitioners are confident candidates and unnecessarily the State of Jharkhand is considering them as 7 candidates under reserved category meant for Para Teachers. This is not permissible in the eye of law."
10. Accordingly, neither the case of the petitioners is covered by judgment dated 16.02.2022 passed in W.P. (S) No. 2378/2019 nor their case is covered by the judgment dated 11.05.2018 passed in L.P.A. No. 186/2017 and other analogous cases. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to make out a case of discrimination or arbitrariness or point out any illegality in the action of the respondents by which the petitioners were not called for counselling. Consequently, no relief, as prayed for, can be granted to the petitioners in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed.
11. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is dismissed as not pressed.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Mukul