Sudhakar Pathak vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 4730 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sudhakar Pathak vs The State Of Jharkhand on 1 May, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                   W.P.(S) No. 2088 of 2024
                 Sudhakar Pathak                                      ... Petitioner
                                      -Versus-
            1. The State of Jharkhand
            2. The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department,
                Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
            3. The Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy
                Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
            4. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj
            5. The District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj
            6. The Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar
            7. The District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar
            8. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka
            9. The District Superintendent of Education, Dumka
            10. The Deputy Commissioner, Godda
            11. The District Superintendent of Education, Godda    ... Respondents
                                           -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Kishore Kumar Singh, S.C.-V

-----

03/01.05.2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Court fee has already

been deposited and so far as defect no.2 is concerned, he will remove the

same in course of the day.

2. Let him do so.

3. Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Mr. Kishore Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State.

4. The prayer is made in this writ petition for direction to the

respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in counselling process to

be conducted for the post of Assistant Teacher under para category for

Class VI-VIII.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical situation,

batch of writ petitions was decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in

W.P.(S) No.189 of 2024 and analogous cases and vide judgment dated

08.02.2024, the learned Single Judge has been pleased to allow the prayer

with regard to counselling of the petitioners of those cases. He also submits

that the similar type of order was challenged before the Division Bench of

this Court in L.P.A. No.510 of 2023 and analogous cases, which were

disposed of vide judgment dated 31.01.2024 and the judgment passed by

the learned Single Judge was affirmed and in paragraph 33 of the said

judgment, further directions have been given.

6. Learned counsel for the State submits that the case of the petitioner

is covered in view of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this

Court in the said L.P.As.

7. Paragraph 33 of the judgment passed in L.P.A. No.510 of 2023 and

analogous cases reads as under:

"33. Since it was the specific case of the writ petitioners that they were never called for counseling and that candidates securing less marks than the writ petitioners were called for counseling and were selected, it would be important to issue the following clarifications / directions in consonance with the specific stand of the various writ petitioners in the batch of cases involved in the impugned order though this Court is not inclined to differ with the findings and directions issued vide order dated 15.09.2023 passed in L.P.A. No. 203 of 2022:-

(a) Only those candidates are to be called for counseling who have never been called for counseling earlier in one or the other district irrespective of the fact as to whether they had participated in the counseling or not.

(b) To enable the candidate to participate in the fresh counseling the concerned respondent shall verify whether a candidate below in the merit list in the concerned district has been ultimately selected irrespective of the fact as to whether such a candidate had joined or not. If that be so, then only such candidate be permitted to appear in the fresh counseling.

(c) There should be one counseling to be conducted

simultaneously in all the districts as was directed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 19 of 2016 and other analogous cases which has been upheld in L.P.A. No. 168 of 2017."

8. In view of the above and considering that the case of the petitioner is

covered in light of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court

in said L.P.As., this petition is being disposed of in terms of the judgment

passed in L.P.A. No.510 of 2023 and analogous cases.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/