Jharkhand High Court
Santosh Chaudhari vs The State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 4 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 109 of 2021
Santosh Chaudhari ..... ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Anr. ..... ...Opposite Parties
with
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 114 of 2021
with
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 124 of 2021
with
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 186 of 2021
with
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 192 of 2021
with
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 193 of 2021
with
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 290 of 2021
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Sr. Advocate
: Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate
: Mrs. Aanya, Advocate
: Mr. Amritansh Vats, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Sr. S.C.-III.
For the JSSC : Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, Advocate.
------
11/ 04.03.2022 These petitions have 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.
2. Pursuant to the order dated 25.02.2022, the Principal
Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and
Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi and the Principal Secretary,
School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand,
Ranchi are in personal appearance through V.C. On repeated query made
by the Court with these two Secretaries with regard to taking a double
standard in appointment, in light of Para-66 of the Full Bench Judgment of
this Court as well as the order of this Court and also the order of the Co-
ordinate Bench and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, both the
Secretaries have submitted that they have passed the reasoned order. This is
unfortunate that two responsible Secretaries of the State have submitted
before this Court that they have passed the reasoned order.
3. This Court has passed the detailed orders on 22.10.2021,
17.12.2021 and also on 25.02.2022, which speak for itself.
4. In Cont. Case (Civil) No. 193 of 2021, a show cause has been
filed on behalf of the O.P. No. 2, wherein at Annexure-B (page-33), the
letter dated 23.11.2020, issued under the signature of Deputy Secretary,
Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha,
Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi has been annexed, wherein it has been
disclosed that there is no legal impediment with regard to appointment of
the teachers in Non-Scheduled districts and this has been issued after the
opinion obtained from the learned Advocate General of the Jharkhand.
5. Two supplementary show cause dated 03.03.2022 in Cont.
Case (Civil) No. 192 of 2021 have been filed by both the Secretaries. In the
supplementary show cause filed by the Department of Personnel
Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, a letter dated 24.02.2022 has been
annexed, wherein it has been disclosed that total 155 recommendations are
pending for the Scheduled Districts and for Non-Scheduled Districts 289
recommendations are pending before the Government and this also speaks
the double standard, in view of the fact that appointments in two districts
with regard to Non-Scheduled areas i.e. Godda and Deoghar districts are
completed. However, in the last paragraph of the letter dated 24.02.2022, it
has been stated that further action for appointment in Non-Scheduled area
shall be made after the decision in S.L.P. No. 14485 of 2020 and S.L.P. No.
12490 of 2020.
6. When the Hon'ble Supreme Court has already clarified in the
said S.L.Ps. to proceed with regard to the Non-Scheduled Areas, there was
no occasion to pass such order, which is contained in the supplementary
show cause, filed by the Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel
Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand,
Ranchi. As such both the contemnors are in the contempt of this Court as
well as contempt of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Artilce-144 of the
Constitution of India stipulates that all authorities, civil and judicial in the
territory of India shall act in aid of the Supreme Court. The oral
submissions made by both the Secretaries are unwarranted, whereby they
have submitted that they have passed the reasoned order. This submission
of both the Secretaries has not been accepted by this Court and the same is
rejected.
7. In the earlier order, it has been recorded that the Government
has taken the double standard, wherein in two districts they have completed
the appointment process and for other districts, they are sitting tight over
the same. The learned Advocate General has also opined that there is no
legal impediment, which has already been discussed (supra) initially. When
the Hon'ble Supreme Court has already clarified to proceed in the matter
so far as the Non-Scheduled areas are concerned, there was no occasion to
pass such order that too when in two of the districts, the State has already
completed the appointment process, so far it relates to Non-Scheduled
areas and two of the subjects i.e. History and Civics in all the districts. It is
very strange that in spite of much opportunity provided to the State,
ridiculous grounds have been taken for not proceeding with the
appointment.
8. In the light of the above discussions and the earlier orders as
well as the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, both the Secretaries are in
contempt. However, further two weeks time is allowed to comply with the
order and come forward with the supplementary show cause, stating therein
that the order has been complied with in its letter and spirit. If the same
shall not be complied on the next date of hearing, this Court will proceed
further in the proceeding against two of the Secretaries.
9. Both the Secretaries are directed to remain physically present
on the next date of listing.
10. Let all these matter be listed on 25.03.2022.
11. This Court has restrained itself from the very beginning to
pass any harsh order. Today also this Court has restrained to pass harsh
order against two of the Secretaries, that will be considered if the order will
not be complied by the next date of listing. Reference may be made to
judgment of the Hon'ble Surpreme Court in the case of Promotee Telecom
Engineers Forum & Ors. Versus D.S. Mathur, Secretary, Department of
Telecommunications, reported in (2008) 11 SCC 579.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Amitesh/-
