Radha Krishna Pathak vs State Of Jharkhand Through Its ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 657 Jhar

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                            W.P.(S) No. 447 of 2019
      1. Radha Krishna Pathak
      2. Dilip Yadav
      3. Saryu Prasad Yadav
      4. Vikram Kumar Paswan
      5. Sabita Kumari
      6. Binita Tirkey
      7. Karuna Tirkey
      8. Shanti Devi
      9. Sidhnath Kumar
      10. Subh Prabhat Singh
      11. Gaytri Kumari                           .... .... Petitioners
                                      Versus
      1.    State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary, Ranchi.
      2.    Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and
            Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
      3. Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, Government
            of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
      4. Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through its Secretary, Ranchi.
      5.    Controller of Examination, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission,
            Ranchi.
      6.     Secretary, Department of Human Recourse and Development,
            Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
                                              .... .... Respondents
                                ------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N. PATHAK (Through Video Conferencing)

------

For the Petitioners : Mr. Kunal Priyam, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Mr. Rishu Ranjan, AC to S.C.-III For the Respondent-JSSC : Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, Advocate

-----

4 / 23.2.2022 Heard the parties.

The petitioners have approached this Court for direction upon the respondents to consider their cases for appointment to the post of Graduate Trained Teacher in pursuance to Advertisement No. 10/2017. Further prayer has been made by the petitioners to hold and declare that the Trained Graduate Teacher in Ancient History and Medieval History are equivalent to History and as such petitioners are entitled for issuance of appointment letters and also to declare that respondents have no power and jurisdiction to deny the appointment to the petitioners merely on the ground that they are having graduate degree in Ancient History and Medieval History.

At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the parties submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition has already been decided by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 4079 of 2018 and other analogous matters and the same has also been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 693 of 2019 and other analogous matters. As such, this writ petition has become infructuous in view of the judgment rendered in L.P.A. No. 693 of 2019.

This writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous.

(Dr. S. N. Pathak, J.)

R.Kr.