Jharkhand High Court
Chumbru Banra vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 December, 2023
Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (S) No. 3701 of 2023
-----
Chumbru Banra ... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
4. The Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi
5. The Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department,
Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi
6. The Deputy Commissioner-cum-Secretary, District Compassionate Appointment
Committee-cum-District Magistrate, Chaibasa
7. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Medium Irrigation Project, Chaibasa
... .... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Samavesh Bhanj Deo, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Vijayant Verma, AC to AAG-IV
-----
Oral Order
04 / Dated : 07.12.2023
1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for a direction upon respondent no. 5 to appoint the petitioner on
compassionate ground as his father died in harness on 28.04.2010 serving as
chainman in the office of Special Land Acquisition Officer, Icha Chaliyama.
2. It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted his representation for
appointment on compassionate ground in the year 2012 which was finally
rejected by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee on the ground
that the education certificate was issued from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar which
was invalid in view of the office order dated 01.06.2015. The ground of
rejection is not sustainable in view of the ratio laid down by the in W.P. (S)
No. 3115 of 2015 wherein it has been held,
"21. This Court, therefore, is of the considered view that the
order/judgment as has been passed by the Full Bench of Patna High
Court, is required to be followed on the ground of similarity of facts
and more particularly the entire facts rest upon Govt. order which was
issued by the erstwhile State of Bihar of the time when State was unified
i.e. vide order dated 11.01.1991. Further, the State of Jharkhand also
adopted the said decision dated 11.01.1991 by issuing order on
03.11.2003.
22. In view thereof, this Court held that the degree of 'Praveshika'
'Sahitya Bhushan' and 'Sahitya Alankar' has got equivalence to
Matriculation, Intermediate and Graduation, as decided vide order
dated 11.01.1991 by the General Administration Department,
Government of Bihar, which was adopted by the State of Jharkhand
vide order dated 03.11.2003, and as such, the validity of order dated
11.01.1991 will be effective up to 26.02.2015.
23. The degrees issued by Hindi Vidapith, Deoghar, are held to be
valid up to 26.02.2015."
3. The Division Bench judgment has been adopted by the Government, the
degrees which have been issued before 26.02.2015 by Hindi Vidyapith,
Deoghar, have been accorded full validity.
4. In the present case, the petitioner passed Pravishika examination in the year
2013 regarding which certificate has been enclosed as Annexure-7 which can
be validly accepted for all matters.
5. Learned counsel for the State-respondent nos. 6 and 7 has submitted that the
petitioner has not submitted his representation before the competent authority
for compassionate appointment within the stipulated time of five years. Even if
he was a minor, application of other family members could have been
considered, had they moved within that time.
6. After having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides and
on perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the ground for rejecting
the petition by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee was that
the education certificate was issued by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar. In view of
the order passed by the Division Bench, the ground taken for rejection is not
sustainable and therefore representation of the Petitioner need to be considered
afresh.
Under the circumstance, the matter is referred back to respondent no. 5 to
reconsider the representation of the petitioner for appointment on
compassionate ground considering the ratio laid down by the Division Bench
of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 3115 of 2015. After considering the
representation, the same will be disposed of within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
Writ petition is disposed of.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
AKT/Satendra
Uploaded
