Jharkhand High Court

Mumtaz Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 29 November, 2023

Author: Rajesh Shankar

Bench: Rajesh Shankar

                                1

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  W.P.(S) No. 5682 of 2023
                            ---

     Mumtaz Ansari                   ...    ...     Petitioner
                               Versus
     1. The State of Jharkhand

2. The Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

3. The Director, Directorate of Primary Education, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

4. The Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar

5. The District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar

6. The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad

7. The District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad

8. The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribag

9. The District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribag .... ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Sadab Bin Haque, Advocate Ms. Sharda Kumari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ravi Kerketta, SC-VI

Order No. 04 Dated: 29.11.2023

The petitioner, who is at present para teacher, has filed

the present writ petition for issuance of direction upon the

respondents to consider his candidature for appointment on the

post of Assistant Teacher (Class I-V) as he has been orally

informed that his candidature has been rejected on the ground

of possessing degree of "Sahitya Alankar" (equivalent to

graduation degree) from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar. Further

prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the

respondent authorities to accommodate him in the counselling

process to be conducted for the post of Assistant Teacher in the

light of judgment dated 16.02.2022 passed by this Court in

W.P.(S) No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. The State of

Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases in respective

districts under non-para category for remaining vacancies of

Intermediate Trained Teachers (Class I to V) and if the petitioner

is found eligible, to be suitably appointed as he has already

applied for the said post under non-para category and thereafter

he was shortlisted for counselling in Deoghar, Dhanbad and

Hazaribag districts, however his name was not published in the

final merit list made for appointment. On making query, the

petitioner was orally informed that as per the government's

direction, the degree awarded by Hindi Vidyapith, Degohar is

not valid and his candidature was not considered due to the said

reason. No written communication was made in this regard with

the petitioner.

2. It is further submitted that the said issue has already

been set at rest by learned Division Bench of this Court vide

order dated 10.05.2022 passed in W.P.(C)No. 3115 of 2015

along with other analogous cases wherein it has been held that

the degree granted by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar prior to

26.02.2015 has to be treated as valid in law. Since the petitioner

has obtained the degree of "Sahitya Alankar" on 12.03.2013 i.e.,

prior to 26.02.2015, the respondents are bound to consider his

candidature.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

respondent nos. 6 and 7 primarily mentioning the earlier rounds

of litigations including the order dated 02.02.2017 passed in

W.P.(S) Nos. 19 of 2016 along with W.P.(S) Nos. 32 of 2016, 146

of 2016, 334 of 2016 as well as the order dated 11.05.2018

passed in L.P.A. No. 168 of 2017. Nothing has been stated with

respect to the petitioner's aforesaid contentions raised in the

writ petition that he was selected for counselling in the districts

of Deoghar, Dhanbad and Hazaribagh in which he participated,

however his name was not published in the final merit list.

4. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that several writ petitions led by W.P.(S) No. 2378 of

2019 [Paras Nath Mandal Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.]

and other analogous cases, fell for consideration of this Court.

The said writ petitions were allowed vide order dated

16.02.2022 with following directions:

"18. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid observations, rules, guidelines, legal propositions and judicial pronouncements, I hereby direct the respondents to initiate process of counseling for the present petitioners by way of last opportunity, since they have obtained more marks than the last selected candidates in the merit list. The petitioners shall approach the Deputy Commissioners of the concerned Districts, as early as possible, preferably, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner shall initiate the process of counseling after giving proper notice to the petitioners by way of Press Communique, advertising the notice in the local newspaper having the wide circulation in the concerned Districts and also by putting the notice on the Notice Board of the Office of concerned District Superintendent of Education and thereafter, the entire process of counseling be completed within a period of further four weeks subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria and also if the present petitioners have secured more marks than the last selected candidates.

Let the entire process be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

19. Let it be made clear that no further counselling shall be held for any reasons whatsoever as the advertisement for appointment of these teachers are of 2015 and the aforesaid directions have been issued in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, which shall be not taken as precedent.

5. The State of Jharkhand, however, preferred L.P.A No.

203 of 2022 [The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Vs. Paras Nath

Mandal] and other analogous cases challenging the order dated

16.02.2022 passed in W.P.(S) No. 2378 of 2019 and other

analogous cases, which were dismissed by learned Division

Bench vide order dated 15.09.2023 with following direction to

the State of Jharkhand:

"57. This Court, on entirety of facts and circumstances, is of the view that the order passed by learned Single Judge needs no interference by this Court and the direction so passed by learned Single Judge needs no interference by this Court and is required to be complied with at an earliest as the vacancies is of the year 2015 and it must be put to logical end without snatching right of candidates, if they are otherwise eligible. Therefore, the appellants-State are hereby directed to:

I. Initiate the process of counseling forthwith for the present petitioners by way of last opportunity as it is alleged they have obtained more marks than the last selected candidates in the merit list in the respective districts. II. The petitioners shall approach the Deputy Commissioners of the concerned Districts, as early as possible, preferably, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

III. However, in the meantime, the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district shall give proper notice to the petitioners by way of Press Communique, advertising the notice in the local newspaper having the wide circulation in the concerned Districts and also by putting the notice on the Notice Board of the Office of concerned District Superintendent of Education.

IV. This Court hopes and trusts that the entire process of counseling will be completed within a period of further eight weeks subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria and also if the present petitioners have secured more marks than the last selected candidates.

V. It is made clear that the entire process of selection shall be made strictly in accordance with relevant rules/regulations and judicial pronouncements, as mentioned above, within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. VI. Let it be made clear that no further counselling shall be held for any reasons whatsoever as the advertisement for appointment of these teachers are of 2015 and the aforesaid directions have been issued in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, which shall be not taken as precedent.

6. It is also submitted that subsequent to disposal of the

aforesaid L.P.As, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order

dated 19.09.2023 has disposed of another writ petition i.e.,

W.P.(S) No. 3406 of 2021 in following terms:

"5. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned

Counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of in terms of the order dated 16.02.2022, passed by this Court in case of in W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases as well as LPA No. 203 of 2022 and if the cases of the present petitioners are found to be same and similar to the cases of the petitioners in W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases, the present petitioner is also entitled for the same benefits.

6. Accordingly, I hereby direct the respondentsauthorities to verify the factual aspects/issues involved in the present writ petition vis. a vis. factual aspects/issues involved in W.P.(S). No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases, and if the facts/issues involved in the present writ petition is found to be similar to the aforementioned writ petition, the same benefits may be extended to the present petitioner also in accordance with law, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order."

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that

batch of writ petitions led by W.P.(S) No. 1233 of 2022 (Dinesh

Kumar Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.) filed by the

similarly situated persons has also been disposed of by this

Court vide order dated 17.10.2023 in terms with direction

contained in order dated 15.09.2023 passed in L.P.A. No. 203 of

2022 and other analogous cases.

8. On putting question to the State counsel as to whether

in pursuance of the order passed by learned Division Bench of

this Court in L.P.A. No. 203 of 2022 and other analogous cases,

press communique with respect to counselling for appointment

of the teachers has been published, it has been replied that no