Jharkhand High Court
Krishna Ballabh Narain Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Others on 27 July, 2016
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 1810 of 2007
Krishna Ballabh Narain Singh son of Paramhans Singh resident of village-
Rajputana Panchena, P.O.-Mohammadpur, P.S.-Koelwar, District- Bhojpur, at
present working as a Driver in the office of District Commissioner, Ranchi.
...... Petitioner.
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand.
2. Dy. Commissioner, Jharkhand, Ranchi.
3. Deputy Collector Nazarat, Ranchi.
.. ...Respondents.
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. C.S. Singh, J.C. to Sr. S.C.-III.
.........
07/27.07.2016: The petitioner, in this writ petition, has prayed for regularization of his service as he was working as Jeep Driver in the office of the Dy. Commissioner, Ranchi, without break in service, on daily wage basis.
2. It is submitted that a recommendation was made to regularize the petitioner, but he was not regularized. He claims that since he has been working since 2005, he should be regularized.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the State, wherein, it has been stated that the Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court in WPS No. 5015 of 2005 (Ajay Kr. Singh and Ors. Vs. The State of Jharkhand and Others) vide order dated 6.12.2005 directed the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi to fill up the vacant, sanctioned post as per law. While doing so, direction was given to consider the case of the petitioners therein along with others after giving relaxation of age and considering the past experience in service. Pursuant to the said direction, an advertisement was published in local newspaper on 21.4.2006. A State Level Appointment Committee was also constituted for making appointment to the said post. Total number of 548 candidates were declared successful.
4. The petitioner submitted his application, seeking appointment for the post of peon. He appeared in the written examination and secured 51 marks out of 60 marks. He was called for interview, in which, he secured 11 marks out of 40 marks. Since he had been working for a period, less than one year from the date of publication of the advertisement,he was not awarded any weightage for work experience. Ultimately, the petitioner was not found to be successful in the General Category. In the said category, the cut off marks was 65 to 85 marks. So the case of the petitioner was not considered as he obtained only 62 marks. It has also been submitted that the name of the petitioner was kept in waiting list, at Sl. No. 9.
5. After going through the record, I find that the petitioner was working absolutely on temporary basis on Daily Wages as as Jeep Driver. Annexure-1 is the note-sheet dated 3.12.2005. It suggests that the petitioner's requests to allow him to work as Jeep Driver on Daily Wages basis, was accepted. This document does suggest that the appointment was made in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. I further find that in pursuant to the direction of this Court, a process of appointment was initiated by the State and thereafter, a panel was prepared. In the said appointment process, the petitioner appeared but he could not achieve the cut off marks, therefore, he was not appointed. The petitioner thereafter, has filed this writ petition praying for his regularization. Since the petitioner worked only for one year prior to initiation of the process of appointment and he was not awarded any weightage and also inspite of the fact that the petitioner had appeared in the selection process but he could not qualify the same, no case is made out by the petitioner to be regularized in service. Since the appointment of the petitioner as Jeep Driver, was not in accordance with law, his services cannot be regularized.
6. Thus, I find no merit in this writ petition. The same is dismissed, accordingly.
(ANANDA SEN , J) Anu/-