Ram Kishun Prasad Verma vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 741 Jhar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                       W.P.(S) No. 199 of 2017
           1. Ram Kishun Prasad Verma, son of Shanti Ram Mahto, R/o Village
               Bemprotand, P.O. Chandipur, P.S. Kasmar, District Bokaro,
               Jharkhand
           2. Kamal Kumar Mahto, s/o Sri Dhirendra Nath Mahto, R/o Village
               Braikhurd, P.O. Chandipur, P.S. Kasmar, District Bokaro, Jharkhand
                                                                   ...       Petitioners
                                         -Versus-
           1. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of
              Jharkhand, At Project Building, P.O. + P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
           2. The Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Personnel, Raj Bhasa &
              Administration Reforms, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi.
           3. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources & Development, Govt. of
              Jharkhand, At Project Building, P.O. + P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
           4. Director, Primary Education, Deptt. of Human Resources &
              Development, Government of Jharkhand, At Project Building, P.O. +
              P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
           5. The Director, Jharkhand Education, Project Council, Co-operative
              Building Shyamli, P.O. + P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi.
           6. The Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro, P.O. + P.S. + District Bokaro.
           7. The District Superintendent of Education, Bokaro, P.O. + P.S. + District
              Bokaro.
           8. Union of India through Secretary, Human Resources & Development
              Department, Government of India, P.O. + P.S. + Dist. New Delhi.
                                                                 ...      Respondents

                CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
                                        ----

For the Petitioners : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : AC to GP-I Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate Mr. Raj Vardhan, Advocate

----

7/ 10.02.2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The issue of regularisation of para teachers has been set at rest by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No.315 of 2016 and analogous cases vide judgment dated 16.12.2022. It has been held that the para teachers cannot be regularized.

3. In this writ petition, the petitioners, who are para teachers, are claiming for regularisation. The issue is thus, covered by the judgment dated 16.12.2022 passed in W.P.(S) No.315 of 2016.

4. Considering the aforesaid fact, this writ petition is also dismissed in view of the judgment dated 16.12.2022 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No.315 of 2016 and analogous cases.

(Ananda Sen, J.) Madhav/-