Anita Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand Through Its ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1960 Jhar

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                W.P.(S) No. 936 of 2020

                Anita Kumari, D/o Arjun Manjhi, aged about 34 years, R/o
                Bangalikothi, P.O. - Jharia, P.S. - Jharia, District - Dhanbad
                (Jharkhand)                                 ...     ...     Petitioner
                                         Versus
                1. State of Jharkhand through its Principal Secretary, Department of
                   Personnel, Administrative reform and Raj Bhasha, P.O. and P.S.
                   Dhurwa, District Ranchi
                2. The Director Primary Education, Human Resources Development
                   Department Government of Jharkhand Project Bhawan Dhurva,
                   P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa District Ranchi, Jharkhand
                3. Secretary School Education and Literacy Department, P.O. and
                   P.S. Dhurva District Ranchi.
                4. The Deputy Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad, P.O. and P.S.
                   Dhanbad, District - Dhanbad (Jharkhand)
                                                     ...        ...        Respondents
                                         And
                      W.P.(S) No. 922 of 2020, W.P.(S) No. 923 of 2020
                      W.P.(S) No. 925 of 2020, W.P.(S) No. 926 of 2020
                      W.P.(S) No. 927 of 2020, W.P.(S) No. 928 of 2020
                      W.P.(S) No. 929 of 2020, W.P.(S) No. 930 of 2020
                      W.P.(S) No. 931 of 2020, W.P.(S) No. 932 of 2020
                      W.P.(S) No. 933 of 2020, W.P.(S) No. 934 of 2020
                      W.P.(S) No. 935 of 2020, W.P.(S) No. 955 of 2020
                                         ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner (s) : Mr. Navneet Sahay, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Shivani Kapoor, A.C. to S.C. II : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sah, A.C. to A.A.G IV : Ms. Priyanka Boby, A.C. to G.A. I : Mr. Prashant Kr. Rai, A.C. to S.C. (L&C) I :Mr. Kunal Chandra Suman, A.C. to S.C. - I : Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, A.C. to Sr. S.C. III

---

04/12.05.2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner (s) Mr. Navneet Sahay in all the cases appears and submits that identical relief has been prayed for in all the writ petitions. Accordingly, the relief as prayed for in W.P. (S) No. 936 of 2020 is quoted hereunder:

"(a) For issuance of an appropriate write in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ (s), Order(s) or Direction(s) to the Respondents for regularization of ad hoc based para teachers with minimum work experience of at least 10 years against the sanctioned post in light of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment dated 10.04.2006 passed in State of Karnataka and Others versus Uma Devi and Other [Civil Appeal No. 3595-3612/99, 1861-2063, 3849/2001, 3520-24/2002 and 1968/2006]

(b) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s), Order(s) or Direction(s)

to the Respondents to pay the salary to the petitioner in terms of relevant pay scale applicable to the similarly situated employees.

(c) For maintaining the status quo of the petitioner as para teacher in the school wherein he is presently appointed till the disposal of the instant writ"

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that he does not have any instruction in the present cases and therefore he does not want to press the present writ petitions.

3. The learned counsels for the respondents have no serious objection to the prayer made.

4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, these writ petitions are dismissed as not pressed.

5. Pending I.A, if any, is closed

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Saurav