Jharkhand High Court
Ram Sunder Prajapati vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 January, 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
---
W.P.(S) No. 231 of 2020
----
Ram Sunder Prajapati, aged 31 years, son of Deoki Prajapati, resident of
Village Bindhani, PO Pitiz, PS Rajpur, District-Chatra
..... Petitioner
-- Versus --
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.The Secretary, Primary Education, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal
House, PO and PS Doranda, District Ranchi
3.The Dy. Commissioner, Hazaribagh, PO and PS Hazaribagh, District
Hazaribagh
4.The Director (Primary Education), Government of Jharkhand, Project
Building, PO, PS-Dhurwa, District Ranchi
5.The District Superintenent of Education, Hazaribagh, PO, PS and District-
Hazaribagh
6.The District Education Officer, Hazaribagh, PO, PS and District-
Hazaribagh ...... Respondents
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioner :- Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, Advocate
For Resp.-State :- Mr. Anis Mishra, Advocate
----
4/25.01.2021 Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Anis Mishra, the learned counsel for the respondent
State.
2. This writ petition has been heard through Video
Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into
account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the
parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and
with their consent this matter has been heard.
3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for direction upon
the respondents to provide appointment letter to the petitioner for
Intermediate-trained teacher.
4. Mr. Dubey, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has appeared in the TET examination and
selected as para-teacher in the year 2006 and he joined on 03.07.2006 at
Utkarmit Primary School Suriwali Pitiz and he was working and getting his
honorarium regularly as para-teacher. The petitioner belongs to most
backward community. Pursuant to Advertisement No.1 of 2015 the
petitioner applied for the post of Intermediate-trained teacher. In the said
advertisement, it was mentioned that some benefit for para-teacher who
will apply on the basis of para-teacher, however, there is no observation
that para-teacher cannot apply as non-para teacher or as independent
candidate and the petitioner's case has not been considered. He submits
that this aspect of the matter has been considered by the Division Bench
in L.P.A. No.186 of 2017 and L.P.A. No.199 of 2017 and certain directions
have been issued and the case of the petitioner is fully covered in view of
the direction in the said two L.P.As.
5. Mr. Anis Mishra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the respondent State submits that the petitioner is not having any
instruction as to whether the case of the petitioner is fully covered in
view of the above orders of the above L.P.As or not.
6. In view of the above facts and considering the submissions
in the writ petition, the writ petition is being disposed of directing the
petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.3 along
with all the credentials on which the petitioner is relying including the
judgment relied by the petitioner in the aforesaid two LPAs within three
weeks.
7. If such representation is filed within the aforesaid period,
the respondent no.3 shall consider the case of the petitioner and will also
examine as to whether the case of the petitioner is covered in terms of
the aforesaid two orders passed in the aforesaid LPAs or not and will
pass a reasoned order within eight weeks thereafter.
8. With the above observation and direction, the instant writ
petition [W.P.(S) No.231 of 2020] stands disposed of.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J)
SI/,
