Jharkhand High Court
Raju Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 10 May, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 1846 of 2024
1. Raju Saw
2. Shambhu Rana
3. Surajmal Chauhan
4. Prasadi Mahato
5. Sunil Saw
6. Amrendra Kumar
7. Rajesh Kumar Yadav
8. Anup Kumar
9. Satywan Kumar
10. Satyendra Kumar Yadav
11. Mantu Prasad
12. Hariom Prasad
13. Dileep Kumar Gupta
14. Kanhai Prasad Gupta
15. Rakesh Kumar
16. Sunil Prajapati
17. Mukesh Prasad
18. Satyanarayan Thakur
19. Gopal Mehta
20. Brajkishor Mehta
21. Kartik Narayan Mehta
22. Surendra Kumar Mehta
23. Krishna Murari Mehta
24. Rekha Kumari
25. Umesh Prasad Agrawal
26. Kumari Binita Singh
27. Kanchan Kumari
28. Manish Kumar Pathak
29. Sanjay Kumar Prajapati
30. Binod Kumar Mandal
31. Mukesh Kumar Pandey
32. Santosh Hembrom
33. Chayarani Tudu
34. Punam Kumari
35. Mamta Pandey
36. Nilam Pushpa Ekka
37. Nandlal Yadav
38. Md. Sehran Ahmed
39. Raghunandan Jha
40. Suman Gupta
41. Sanjay Kumar Mehra ... Petitioners
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, School Education and
Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
-1- W.P.(S) No. 1846 of 2024
2. The Secretary, Secondary Education, School Education and Literacy
Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Director, Secondary Education, School Education and Literacy
Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
4. The Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro
5. The Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara
6. The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad
7. The Deputy Commissioner, Pakur
8. The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh
9. The Deputy Commissioner, Giridih
10. The Deputy Commissioner, Godda
11. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj
12. The Deputy Commissioner, Koderma
13. The Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh
14. The Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar
15. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka
16. The Deputy Commissioner, Chatra
17. The Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa
18. The Deputy Commissioner, Palamau
19. The Deputy Commissioner, Latehar
20. The Deputy Commissioner, Khunti
21. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi
22. The Deputy Commissioner, Gumla
23. The Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga
24. The Deputy Commissioner, Simdega
25. The Deputy Commissioner, Saraikela-Kharsawan
26. The Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa
27. The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur
28. The District Superintendent of Education, Bokaro
29. The District Superintendent of Education, Jamtara
30. The District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad
31. The District Superintendent of Education, Pakur
32. The District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh
33. The District Superintendent of Education, Giridih
34. The District Superintendent of Education, Godda
35. The District Superintendent of Education, Sahebganj
36. The District Superintendent of Education, Koderma
37. The District Superintendent of Education, Ramgarh
38. The District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar
39. The District Superintendent of Education, Dumka
40. The District Superintendent of Education, Chatra
41. The District Superintendent of Education, Garhwa
42. The District Superintendent of Education, Palamau
43. The District Superintendent of Education, Latehar
44. The District Superintendent of Education, Khunti
45. The District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi
46. The District Superintendent of Education, Gumla
47. The District Superintendent of Education, Lohardaga
-2- W.P.(S) No. 1846 of 2024
48. The District Superintendent of Education, Simdega
49. The District Superintendent of Education, Saraikela-Kharsawan
50. The District Superintendent of Education, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa
51. The District Superintendent of Education, East Singhbhum,
Jamshedpur ... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Petitioners : Mr. Anuj Kumar Trivedi, Advocate
Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, Advocate
Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Suman Marandi, A.C. to S.C.-IV
-----
03/10.05.2024 Heard Mr. Anuj Kumar Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Mr. Suman Marandi, learned counsel for the State.
2. The prayer is made in this writ petition for direction to the
respondents to allow the petitioners to participate in counselling process to
be conducted for the post of Assistant Teacher (Class I to V) and (Class VI
to VIII) in respective districts under para and non-para categories.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners 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 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.
4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the case of the petitioners
is covered in view of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this
Court in the said L.P.As.
5. 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."
6. In view of the above and considering that the case of the petitioners
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/
