Puja Kachhap vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3503 Jhar

                                                1




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              W.P.(S) No. 1382 of 2019
        1.     Puja Kachhap
        2.     Kiran Tirkey
        3.     Neelam Kumari                               ....     Petitioners
                                          Versus
         1.    The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Home, Jail and Disaster
               Management, Ranchi.
         2.    Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms &
               Rajbhasa, Ranchi.
         3.    Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi.
         4.    Controller of Examination, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission,
               Ranchi.
                                                           .... Respondents
                                   ------

CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK

------

         For the Petitioners          : Mr. Onkar Nath Tewari, Advocate
         For the Resp-State           : Mr. Abhinay Kumar, Advocate

For the Resp.-Commission : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate

-----

10/ 14.09.2023 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for quashing of the orders dated 27.11.2018 and 8.10.2018 (Annexure-7), whereby the candidatures of the petitioners for appointment on the post of Constable pursuant to Advertisement No. 08/2017 have been rejected mainly on the ground that the petitioners have not submitted the valid caste certificates claiming reservation in their respective categories. The petitioners have also prayed for direction upon the respondent nos. 3 and 4 to recommend their cases for appointment in the reserved category in view of caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioners.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the parties submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition has already been decided by this Court in the case of Raj Kumar Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors., reported in (2020) 1 JBCJ 465 (HC), wherein this Court has held that "since the petitioners failed to fulfill the requisite conditions stipulated in the advertisement and could not submit valid caste certificate issued by competent authority within stipulated period, their candidatures under respective reserved categories have rightly been rejected". Learned counsel further submits that the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A No 610/2017 and L.P.A No.618/2017

(Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission -Vs- State of Jharkhand and Ors.) after considering the several judgments of this Hon'ble court and other Hon'ble High Courts has been pleased to held that "where there is no cut-off date fixed for submission of caste certificate in that case Ram Kumar Gijroya case is applicable and where there is specific date i.e cut -off date mentioned in the Advertisement for submission of caste certificate, the ratio of Ram Kumar Gijroya case will not be applicable".

4. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, coupled with the ratio laid down by this Court as well as by the Division Bench of this Court, which has been affirmed up-to the Hon'ble Apex Court, nothing remains to be decided in the present writ petition afresh.

5. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) R.Kr.