Jharkhand High Court
Manoj Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 23 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P (S) No. 6065 of 2019
1. Manoj Kumar
2. Bhagwat Tudu
3. Hari Kumar Dev
4. Matuk Dhari Das
5. Jay Prakash Nayak
6. Nand Kishor Nayak
7. Ajay Kumar Jaiswal
8. Shiv Pujan
9. Bhuneshwar Mahto
10. Ishwar Lal Mahto
11. Niranjan Kumar
12. Rama Shankar
13. Phirtu Ram
14. Dhirendra Nath Das
15. Dipak Kumar Bauri
16. Gokhool Rajwar
17. Baldeo Nayak
18. Lakhan Lal Munda
19. Syed Parwez Ahmed
20. Kumari Meena
21. Subhash Rajwar
22. Laxmi Narayan Sudhanshu
23. Vishwa Nath Manjhi
24. Reena Devi, W/o Late Manoj Kumar
25. Rudra Nath Murmu --- --- Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms & Raj Bhasha
Department, Govt. of Jharkhand
3. The Deputy Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms & Raj Bhasha
Department, Govt. of Jharkhand
4. The Secretary, School Education & Literacy Department, Govt. of
Jharkhand, Ranchi
5. The Director, Primary Education, School Education & Literacy Department,
Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi
6. The Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro
7. The District Superintendent of Education, Bokaro --- --- Respondents
---
CORAM: Hon'ble The Acting Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan
---
For the Petitioners: Mr. Amit Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Suresh Kumar, S.C (L&C)-II,
Mr. Ashish Kumar Shekhar, A.C to S.C (L&C)-II
---
07 / 23.01.2023 I.A. No. 8423/2022 seeks deletion of the name of the petitioner no. 24 as
he has passed away during pendency of the writ application on 09.08.2022 and
his substitution by his legal heir / widow Reena Devi named at para-4 of the
instant I.A.
Learned counsel for the Respondent State does not have any objection.
Accordingly, let petitioner no. 24 be substituted by his legal heir / widow
namely, Reena Devi in the array of parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners
is permitted to make necessary substitution in course of the day. The order
sheet shall also reflect the substituted name of the petitioner no. 24. I.A. stands
disposed of.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. Writ petition was preferred with the following prayers.
i. For issuance of an appropriate writ (s) / order (s) / direction (s),
or a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of Letter dated
26.02.2015 (Annexure-8) issued under the pen & signature of the
Respondent No. 2 whereby & where under Departmental Letter
No. 6063 dated 03.11.2003 has been withdrawn and it has been
decided that the degree granted by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar is
not recognized for any purpose including promotion /
appointment in Govt. Services:
ii. Further for issuance of an appropriate writ (s) / order (s) /
direction (s), or a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of
Letter dated 01.06.2015 (Annexure-8/A) issued under the pen &
signature of the Respondent No. 3 whereby & where under Letter
dated 26.02.2015 will have retrospective effect i.e. the degree
granted by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar even before issuance of this
letter is not recognized for any purpose:
iii. For issuance of an appropriate writ (s) / order (s) / direction
(s), in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon and directing
the respondents to include the names of the petitioners in the
Gradation List prepared by the Office of the District
Superintendent of Education, Bokaro in accordance with Govt.
Resolution bearing Memo No. 3027 dated 14.12.2015, which has
been issued in compliance of judgment passed in case of W.P (S)
No. 638/2006 (Arun Sinha and others - Vs - The State of
Jharkhand & ors.) which has been affirmed in L.P.A. No.
214/2008 and also by Apex Court in Spl. Leave to Appeal No.
5520 - 5522/ 2013:
iv. For issuance of an appropriate writ (s) / order (s) / direction
(s), in the nature of Mandamus, commanding upon and directing
the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for
promotion in higher grade i.e. Grade-3 & Grade- 4. Grade - 1
scale has been given from date of their joining, as per the
judgment rendered in case of Sunil Kumar Bhagat - Vs - The
State and analogous case i.e. W.P (S) No. 2547/2014:
4. The main grievance of the petitioners relating to de-recognition of the
qualification of Sahitya Alankar obtained by the petitioners from Hindi
Vidyapith, Deoghar has been settled by virtue of the judgment rendered by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P (C) No. 3115/2015 [Vijoy Kumar
Versus The State of Jharkhand & others] and analogous cases (Annexure-12
to the supplementary affidavit). Petitioners were appointed on the post of
Assistant Teacher in Elementary Schools in the State of Jharkhand in the
respective years on the basis of such qualification. Details of the petitioners are
furnished in the form of a chart at Paragraph-6 of the writ petition which is
extracted hereunder:
Sl. Name of the Date of Date of Degree of P.G.
No. petitioners & Appointment Joining Deoghar Degree
qualification at the Vidyapith
time of appointment equivalent to
B.A.
1. Manoj Kumar, I. Sc. 07.11.1999 21.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A.
2. Bhagwat Tudu, I.Sc 28.06.1999 22.07.1999 Sahitya Alankar ---
3. Hari Kumar Dev, 06.10.1994 19.10.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
Matric
4. Matuk Dhari Das, I. 07.11.1994 12.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
Sc
5. Jay Prakash Nayak, 06.10.1994 19.10.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
Matric
6. Nand Kishor Nayak, 06.10.1994 19.10.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A
Matric
7. Ajay Kumar Jaiswal, 06.10.1994 18.10.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
I. Sc
8. Shiv Pujan, 07.11.19... 24.11.19... Sahitya Alankar M.A
I. Com
9. Bhuneshwar Mahto, 06.10.1994 18.10.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A
I. Sc
10. Ishwar Lal Mahto, 07.11.1994 14.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A
Matric
11. Niranjan Kumar, 06.10.1994 18.10.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
Matric
12. Rama Shankar, 07.11.1994 12.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A.
Matric
13. Phirtu Ram, I. Sc. 07.11.1994 14.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A
14. Dhirendra Nath Das, 09.02.1987 10.02.1987 Sahitya Alankar ---`
Matric
15. Dipak Kumar Bauri, 07.11.1994 15.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
Matric
16. Gokhool Rajwar, 09.02.1987 10.02.1987 Sahitya Alankar ---
Matric
17. Baldeo Nayak, I. Sc. 06.10.1994 21.10.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
18. Lakhan Lal Munda, 19.11.1994 25.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
Matric
19. Syed Parwez 07.11.1994 19.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A.
Ahmed, I. Sc.
20. Kumari Meena, Inter 11.12.1988 12.12.1988 Sahitya Alankar M.A.
21. Subhash Rajwar, 09.02.1987 10.02.1987 Sahitya Alankar ---
I.A.
22. Laxmi Narayan ...... 21.09.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A.
Sudhanshu, I. Sc.
23. Vishwa Nath 06.10.1994 26.10.1994 Sahitya Alankar M.A.
Manjhi, I. Sc.
24. Manoj Kumar, I. Sc. 07.11.1994 11.11.1994 Sahitya Alankar ---
25. Rudra Nath Murmu, 08.07.1999 27.07.1999 Sahitya Alankar ---
I.A.
5. Learned Coordinate Bench of this Court has inter-alia held as follows:
"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 Vidyapith, Deoghar, are
held to be valid up-to 26.02.2015.
It is clarified that no benefit is to be given on the basis of
degrees issued by the institution in question, Hindi
Vidyapith, Deoghar, after 26.02.2015.
24. In consequence thereof, the petitioners are directed to
approach before the respondents-authorities within a period
of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order
for consequential benefit of promotion etc.
Upon receipt/production of such order, the respondents-
authorities shall take appropriate decision in accordance
with law and on examining the facts of individual writ
petitioner preferably within a period of three months from
the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
Needless to say that if one or the other writ petitioners are
found eligible, the benefits shall be granted within further
period of three months from the date of such decision.
However, in case of any adverse decision, the same shall be
communicated to the individual petitioner within the
aforesaid period.
25. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ
petitions stands allowed to the aforesaid extent."
6. Having regard to the pronouncement made by the Coordinate Bench of
this Court in W.P (C) No. 3115/2015 and analogous cases, validity of degree of
Sahitya Alankar declared equivalent to the graduation, as per the order dated
11.01.1991 by the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department,
Government of Bihar adopted by the State of Jharkhand vide order dated
03.11.2003, has been made effective up to 26.02.2015.
Further grievance of the petitioners relates to seniority in the gradation
list because they have been left out on account of holding the qualification of
Sahitya Alankar during the same period in question.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that gradation list has been
prepared, but petitioners have been excluded therefrom. They are serving in the
district of Bokaro. It is a district-cadre post.
9. Learned counsel for the State submits that the main issue relating to
recognition of qualification of Sahitya Alankar equivalent to the graduation has
been settled by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P (C) No. 3115/2015.
Learned counsel for the State however submits that since the petitioners have
claimed that the qualification of Sahitya Alankar has been obtained by them
prior to 15.02.2015, they should approach the competent authority /
Respondent No. 4 through proper channel of the District Superintendent of
Education, Bokaro (Respondent No. 7) for redressal of their grievances.
10. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and
in view of the position in law settled by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P (C) No. 3115/2015, we are of the opinion that the petitioners are required
to approach the competent authority / Respondent No. 4 through proper channel
for redressal of their remaining grievances relating to correction in the
gradation list and inclusion of their names at proper place, as per inter-se
seniority among teachers in the district. Such representation be made within a
period of two weeks from the date of this order. Needless to say, the competent
authority / Respondent No. 4 should consider their representation in accordance
with law within a reasonable time, preferably within sixteen weeks from the
date of receipt of the representation. Writ petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, A.C.J)
(Deepak Roshan, J)
Ranjeet
