Sunil Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 3903 Jhar

                                     1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           W.P.(S) No.5110 of 2011
                                         -------

1. Sunil Kumar

2. Santosh Kumar Soni

3. Jitendra Singh

4. Pravin Kumar

5. Basuki Nath Banerjee

6. Usman Gani

7. Kunal Kumar ..... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand.

2. The Secretary, Labour & Employment Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

3. The Director, Labour & Employment Department, Govt.

of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

4. The Secretary, Jharkhand Entrance Competitive Examination Board, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

                                         .....             ....     Respondents
                                         -------
        CORAM        : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
                                         -------
        For the Petitioners                    :Mr. J.S. Tripathi, Adv.
        For the Res.State                      :Mr. Rahul Saboo, S.C.I
                                         -------
07/20.10.2021        Heard learned counsel for the parties through

        V.C.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred

by the petitioners for following reliefs:-

(i) For quashing the advertisement No.18

dated 07.07.2009, which has been illegally and

arbitrarily published by the Jharkhand

Combined Entrance Competitive Examination

Board, for the post of Instructors of Industrial

Training Institute whereby essential qualification

for the post of Instructor is one year Advanced

Training from Govt. Training Institute i.e.

Teaching Training.

(ii) To appoint the petitioners and post them as

senior to those who are untrained, it untrained

are appointed.

(iii) For stay of the appointment of untrained

instructors.

(iv) For appointment of petitioners who are

fulfilling all the requirements for the post of

instructors having degree of one year Advanced

Training from D.G.E & T, Govt. Training

Institutes, situated in different places of country.

(v) To appoint the candidates who possesses

the Instructors Training Certificate for the post

of Instructors in I.T.I's /I.T.C's as per NCVT

norms and not to appoint any candidate who do

not possesses such degree.

3. Mr. J. S. Tripathi, learned counsel for the

petitioners fairly submits that due to passage of time he is

not pressing the main prayer as several appointments must

have been made till date; however, since several judgments

has been passed by various High Courts on the issue

involved in this case; as such, the instant writ application

may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioners to file

fresh representation/(s) for reconsideration of their case.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent does not

have any objection.

5. In view of the limited submission of the learned

counsel for the petitioners, the instant writ application is

hereby disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioners to file

fresh representation/(s) before the concerned respondent

within a period of four weeks. If, any such,

representation(s) is/are filed within the aforesaid stipulated

period then the concerned respondent shall take a decision

with regard to consideration for appointment of these

petitioners in accordance with law, rules and regulations

and applicable notification within a period of four months

from the date of receipt of such representation/(s).

6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ

application stands disposed of.

(Deepak Roshan, J.) Fahim/-