Jharkhand High Court
Bandna Bharti vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 October, 2024
Author: Deepak Roshan
Bench: Deepak Roshan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 625 of 2021
1.Bandna Bharti, aged about 37 years, daughter of late Gulab Das,
Permanent Resident of Mathbari, Bela Bagan, PO-Dabur Gram, PS-
Deoghar, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand)
2. Sushma Badaik, aged about 46 years, wife of Shri Meghu Baraik,
Permanent Resident of Village-Banai Dega, PO-Obira Sunderpur, PS-
Palkot, District-Gumla (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative
Reforms and Rajbhasa, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, P.O & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.
3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative
Reforms and Rajbhasa, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, P.O & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.
4. The Under Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms
and Rajbhasa, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O
& P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.
5. The Jharkhand Public Service Commission, through its secretary,
Circular Road, P.O & P.S. -Lalpur, District- Ranchi.
6. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Public Service Commission,
Circular Road, P.O & P.S. -Lalpur, District- Ranchi.
7. Nirmal Soren, C/o- Department Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa,
Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa,
P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
8.Prabhakar Mirdha, C/o- Department Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
9. Chuteshwar Kumar Das, C/o- Department Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
10. Salini Khalkho, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
11. Md. Juhur Alam, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
1
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
12.Minakshi Bhagat, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
13. Mukesh Kumar Bauri, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
14. Priti Sinha, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
15. Rudra Pratap, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
16.Amit Kumar, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
17. Lekh Raj Nag, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
18. Nitu Kumari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
19.Kanchan Kumari Bhudolia, C/o- Department of Personnel,
Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office
at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
20. Sudhir Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
21. Pradeep Kumar Mahto, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
22. Monia Lata, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
23. Sanjay Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
2
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
24. Diwakar Prasad Chandrika Prasad Dwivedi, C/o- Department of
Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand,
having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa,
District Ranchi.
25. Vivek Kumar Mehta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
26. Santosh Gupta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
27. Aftab Ahmad, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
28. Aruna Kumari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
29. Ravindra Kumar Gupta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
30. Ashok Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
31. Bipin Kumar Dubey, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
32. Nitin Shivam Gupta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
33. Uday Razak, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
34. Kumar Abhishek Singh, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
35. Smt. Priyanka Singh, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
3
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
36. Rajiv Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
37. Deepmala, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
38. Smt. Parul Singh, C/o- Personnel Administrative and Rajbhasa,
Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa,
P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
39. Premchand Kumar Sinha, C/o- Department of Personnel,
Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office
at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
40. Arun Oraon, C/o- Personnel Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government
of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S.
Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
41. Kanchan Singh, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
42. Nagendra Tiwari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
43. Praveen Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
44. Gunjan Kumari Sinha, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
45. Md. Mozahid Ansari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
46. Rupesh Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
47.Alok Waran Keshari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
4
48. Rajendra Prasad Gupta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
49. Anuj Bando, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
50. Ram Ratan Kumar Barnawal, C/o- Department of Personnel,
Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office
at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
51. Rakesh Kumar Gope, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
52. Arun Kumar Munda, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
53. Amitabh Bhagat, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
54. Dinesh Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
55. Akhilesh Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
56. Khakha Shushil Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
57. Chandan Prasad, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
58. Kuldeep Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
59. Shasi Kant Siknkar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
60. Sameer Reniar Khalkho, C/o- Department of Personnel,
5
Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office
at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
61. Yesmita Singh, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
62. Malay Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
63. Ashok Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
64. Santosh Kumar Prajapati, C/o- Department of Personnel,
Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office
at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
65. Md. Anish, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
66. Vedwanti Kumari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
67. Umesh Kumar Swansi, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
68. Sunil Verma, C/o-Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
69. Dipti Priyanka Kujur, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
70. Sashi Bushan Verma, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
71. Sanju Kumari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
72. Jaya Sankhi Murmu, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
6
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
73. Maruti Minj, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
74. Amren Dang, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
75. Sandeep Bhagat, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
76. Shankaracharaya Samad, C/o- Department of Personnel,
Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office
at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
77. Vijay Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi,
78. Satendar Mahto, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
79. Umesh Mandal, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
80. Amit Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
81. Md. Quayum Ansari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
82. Savita Topno, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
83. Naziya Afroz, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District
Ranchi.
84. Pritilata Kisku, C/o- Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa,
Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa,
P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
7
85. Sunil Kumar Prajapati, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
86. Ram Narayan Khalkho, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
87. Sima Dipika Toppo, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
88. Sumant Tirki, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
89. Sachidanand Mahto, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
90. Naresh Razak, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
91. Manoranjan Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
92. Gautam Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
93. Kamini Kausahl Lakra, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
94. Pritilata Murmu, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
95. Amrita Khakah, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
96. Pankaj Kumar Ravi, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
97. Bimal Soren, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
8
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
98.Ravindra Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
99. Vinay Prakash Tigga, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
100. Md. Zulfikar Ansari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
101. Ravi Kishore Ram, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
102. Anita Karketa, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
103. Johan Tudu, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
104. Sarwan Ram, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa
105. Rajesh Dungdug, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
106. Gyan mani Ekka, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
107. Anil Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
108. Anil Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
109. Smt. Kiran Bodra, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
9
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
110. Siman Marandi, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
111. Smt. Sashi Nilima Dungdung, C/o- Department of Personnel,
Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office
at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi
112. Vivek Kumar Suman, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
113. Rajesh Ekka, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
114. Reshma Dungdug, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
115. Jaypal Soye, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
116. Kirshna Murari Tirki, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
117. Sameer Alfred Murmu, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative
and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
118. Sukeshni Kerketta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
119. Nisha Tirkey, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. ... ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioners : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate
Mr. Anurag Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Aman Dayal Singh, Advocate
For the Pvt. Respondents : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate
10
Mr. Chanchal Jain, Advocate
[For Resp. Nos.19, 20, 23, 26, 29, 38,
45, 47, 55, 60, 61, 64, 65, 76, 82, 88,
89, 92, 93, 96, 99, 102, 111, 114, 115 &
118]
Mr. A. Allam, Sr. Advocate
Miss Sushmita Kumar, Advocate
Miss Asjia Sultana, Advocate
[For Resp. Nos. 8, 11 & 13]
For the Respondent-JPSC : Mr. Abhay Prakash, Advocate
For the Respondent-State : Mrs. Pinky Tiwary, AC to AG
--------
JUDGMENT
CAV on 25/07/2024 Pronounced on 04/10/2024
The instant writ application has been preferred by the
petitioners praying for the following reliefs:
"I. For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s), particularly a writ in nature
mandamus commanding upon Respondent No. 5 (Respondent-JPSC) to issue appropriate
orders improving the date of recommendation of appointments of the Petitioners, i.e. on the
date when the similarly situated candidates of 3 rd Combined Civil Services Examination,
conducted by JPSC, were recommended for appointment (change from the date 30.04.2013
to the date 02.08.2010); and further pass directions upon Respondent State to improve the
date of appoints of the Petitioners i.e., w.e.f. from the date when the similarly situated
candidates of 3rd Combined Civil Services Examination were appointed/offered
appointment (change from the date 08.06.2013 to the date 11.08.2010).
II. For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s), particularly a writ in nature of
certiorari for quashing of notification no 5835, dated 13.11.2020, issued under the
signature of Respondent no. 2, as contained in Annexure- 13, whereby and where under the
seniority of the petitioners have been wrongly fixed, and they have been placed below the
candidates, i.e. respondent no. 7 to 119, these Private Respondents have been recommended
appointment by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission on the post of Deputy Collector
in 4th Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of the Adv. No. 07/2010, whereas the
petitioners were recommended for appointment by the Jharkhand Public Service
Commission on the post of Deputy Collector in 3 rd Combined Civil Services Examination in
terms of Adv. No. 11/2007.
III. For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s), particularly a writ in the
nature of mandamus directing the Respondents No. 1 to 4 to prepare fresh/revised seniority
list by rectifying the mistakes/discrepancies in seniority list as contained in notification no.
5835, dated 13.11.2020, issued by the Respondent No. 2, directing to placing the Petitioner
No. 1 at serial no. 295 i.e. just above the Respondent No. 7, Nirmal Soren and Petitioner
No. 2 at serial no. 296 i.e. just above respondent no 8, Prabhkar Mirdha, meaning thereby,
over and above the candidates of 4 combined JPSC; and further rearrange Petitioners'
seniority on the basis of their merit position amongst the members of 3 rd JPSC, in
accordance with the results of 3rd JPSC examinations."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an
Advertisement No. 11/2007 was issued by the Jharkhand Public Service
Commission (in short, JPSC) for the 3rd Combined Civil Services
Examination for appointment to the post of Deputy Collector and Deputy
Superintendent of Police and on other posts. The recommendation of
selected and successful candidates was made on 02.08.2010 and
appointment notification was published on 11.08.2010. This contained list
of candidates granted appointment by the State and the names of the
petitioners were not there in the recommended list or the appointed list.
3. At this juncture itself it is necessary to indicate that on the one
hand, the JPSC issued another Advertisement No. 07 of 2010 by which the
selection process of 4th Combined Civil Services Examination has been
started; and on the other hand, the petitioner no. 1 on perusal of answer
sheet of Geography Paper-1 found that 24 marks as awarded by the
examiner were not added in her total marks of Geography Paper-1;
whereas the petitioner no. 2 on perusal of her answer sheet of
Anthropology Paper-1 found that 7 marks were not added in total marks of
Anthropology Paper-1. Accordingly, the petitioners moved before this
Court.
Vide order dated 03.10.2012 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3532/2012,
this Court directed the JPSC to issue fresh marks-sheet in favour of the
petitioner no. 2. The corrected marks-sheet was issued in favour of
petitioner no. 2 showing therein total marks of the petitioner no. 2 as 781.8
marks in ST category which was much higher than the last selected and
recommended candidate in ST category. The petitioner no. 1 was also
issued corrected marks-sheet by showing therein that she has secured 784
marks in SC category which was above the last selected and recommended
candidate in SC category.
4. However, even after issuance of corrected marks-sheet, the
JPSC did not consider the representations of the petitioners and therefore
they preferred W.P.(S) Nos. 3672/2012 and 7598/2012 which were heard
and disposed of by this Court in terms of orders dated 03.01.2013 and
16.11.2013 respectively directing the JPSC to pass appropriate order in
accordance with law observing inter alia that it prima facie appears to be a
serious case of latches and discrimination.
Pursuant thereto; the JPSC vide Letter No. 1190 dated
30.04.2013 recommended the name of the petitioners before the
respondent no. 2 for their appointment to the post of Deputy Collector in
3rd Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of Advertisement
No. 11 of 2007. The Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms
and Rajbshasa, Government of Jharkhand vide Notification Nos. 4918 and
4919 dated 08.06.2013 appointed these petitioners on the post of Deputy
Collector with a rider that their seniority will be decided as per the
seniority list of the JPSC.
5. Subsequently, the Department of Personnel, Administrative
Reforms and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand vide order as contained
in Memo No. 2282 dated 11.05.2020 issued the provisional seniority list
and further directed to submit the objections, if any, for determination of
seniority. The petitioners submitted their objection before the respondent
no. 2 on 22.05.2020 and 19.05.2020 respectively, stating therein that
fixation of their seniority at serial nos. 407 and 408, after candidates who
have been recommended for appointment in 4th Combined Civil Services
Examination is illegal in view of the circulars dated 12.12.1934,
15.07.1944, etc. and in view of the fact that they have been recommended
by the JPSC for appointment on the post of Deputy Collector in 3 rd
Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of Advertisement No.
11/2007 and as such in view of the Rules and Regulations of the State
Government their seniority has to be fixed along with candidates who have
been recommended for appointment in 3rd Combined Civil Services
Examination and on the basis of marks secured by the petitioners.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the
petitioner no. 1 belongs to SC category and has secured 784 marks and the
petitioner no. 2 belongs to ST category and has secured 781.8 marks and
as such petitioner no. 1 is entitled to be placed in the seniority list above
Nirmal Soren, i.e. serial no. 295 and petitioner no.2 is entitled to be placed
above Prabhakar Mirda i.e. serial no. 296 of the seniority list; however, the
respondent no. 2 without considering the objections as submitted by the
petitioners, published the final seniority list vide Notification No. 5835
dated 13.11.2020 in which petitioners have again been placed and shown
at serial nos. 407 and 408 respectively.
He further contended that in terms of the circulars of the State
Government dated 13.07.1971 and 26.08.1972 and other circulars of the
united State of Bihar which are applicable in the State of Jharkhand in
terms of Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 the seniority of all the selected
and recommended candidates have to be fixed on the basis of marks
secured by the candidates in 3rd Combined Civil Services Examination in
terms of Advertisement No. 11 of 2007.
He further submits that under similar circumstance the case of
one Dr. Madhu Mishra was considered by this Court in W.P.(S) 2371 of
2014 and directions were passed on 10.08.2017, 31.08.2017 and
20.09.2017 deciding the case of the said Dr. Madhu Mishra. Pursuant to
the directions of this Court, the JPSC improved the date of
recommendation of appointment by publishing appropriate corrigendum
and further the Ranchi University improved the date of appointment and
subsequent seniority position vide orders dated 03.11.2017 and 17.11.2017
respectively.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners lastly submits that it is
crystal clear that the petitioners were not at fault for giving their joining on
30.04.2013 instead they were fully entitled for appointment/joining on
02.08.2010, inasmuch as, it was due to the latches on the part of
Commission that the petitioners were forced to knock the door of this
Court for their appointment and it was only due to intervention of this
Court that the petitioners were recommended for appointment by the JPSC.
Accordingly, the date of recommendation of these petitioners may be
shifted from 30.04.2013 to 02.08.2010 and in pursuance to the shift in the
date of recommendation the date of appointment of these petitioners may
be shifted from 08.06.2013 to 11.08.2010 i.e. from the date when similarly
situated other candidates of the 3rd Combined Civil Services Examination
have been inducted into service and thereafter all consequential benefits
may be extended to them.
8. Learned counsels for the JPSC and State-respondents submit
that since the names of the petitioners were not included, they preferred
writ petitions being W.P.(C) No. 3532/2012 for issuing fresh mark-sheets
after re-totaling the marks of the petitioners and W.P.(C) No. 3672/2012 for
directing the respondent-JPSC to recommend the names of the petitioners
for appointment in terms of 3rd Combined Civil Services Examination,
2008. The aforesaid writ petitions were allowed vide orders dated
03.10.2012 and 03.01.2013 and accordingly after re-totaling the marks of
the petitioners it was found that the total marks of the petitioners were
more than that of the last selected candidates in their respective category.
However, since all the vacancies were filled under 3 rd
Combined Civil Services Examination, 2008, the respondent-JPSC vide its
letters dated 24.09.2012 and 08.03.2013 requested the respondent-
Department to provide vacancy for 02 posts (01 post in the Scheduled
Caste and 01 post in Scheduled Tribe category), so that the
recommendation of the petitioners could be sent for appointment on the
post of Deputy Collector.
9. Consequently, the respondent-Department vide Letter
No. 3031 dated 05.04.2013 provided the requisition for 02 posts to the
respondent-JPSC and accordingly recommendations were sent for
appointment of the petitioners. Learned counsel further submits that while
appointing the petitioners, the last selected SC/ST candidate of the 3 rd
Combined Civil Services Examination, 2008 had not been dismissed or
discharged from their service and hence the petitioners have not been
appointed against the vacancies of the 3rd Combined Civil Services
Examinations, 2008; rather they have been appointed against fresh
vacancies that were created specifically for their appointment.
10. Learned counsel for the private-respondents submits that
seniority is reckoned from the date when an employee is born in the cadre
(date of joining). The principle of reckoning seniority on the basis of date
of joining i.e. the date on which an incumbent is born in the cadre is
widely accepted and legal in the eyes of law. He further submits that two
candidates from 4th Batch have been placed at serial nos. 620 and 621 in
the seniority list as per their date of joining while their batch-mates have
been placed much above them as per their date of joining. Further, the
abovementioned statements are substantiated by the fact that the officer at
serial nos. 303 and 304 belonging to 3rd Batch have joined in the year 2011
and accordingly they have been placed below all other candidates of their
batch who have joined in the year 2010 and hence in the instant case
placing the petitioners below the answering respondents is neither illegal
nor unjust and therefore the instant writ petition is fit to be dismissed.
It has been further submitted that the petitioners have been
given conditional appointment as in the appointment letter issued to the
petitioners, it had been made clear and in specific stipulation that their
seniority will be decided on the basis of the recommendation of the JPSC.
11. It has been contended that the aforesaid appointment letters
were neither challenged by the petitioners before this Court nor any
objections were raised at the relevant time; meaning thereby, the
petitioners knowing fully well that their seniority will be decided on the
basis of the recommendation of the JPSC joined on the post of Deputy
Collector and therefore they cannot now claim for seniority particularly
when the appointment letter has attained finality and also considering the
fact that the impugned seniority list has been issued after necessary
consultation of the respondent-JPSC.
12. In crux the respondents made following submissions:
(i) Date of appointment cannot be shifted to interior date when
there was no vacancy.
(ii) Seniority is reckoned from a date when a candidate is born in
the cadre.
(iii) Seniority once settled cannot be unsettled.
(iv) The petitioners' case should also be dismissed on the ground
of delay and latches.
In order to buttress their argument the respondents have relied
upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
"Roma Sonkar v. M.P. State Public Service Commission & Anr."
reported in (2018) 17 SCC 106, where in paragraph no.5 it has been stated
as under:
"5. In the above circumstances, we are of the view that it is only in the interest
of justice and for doing complete justice between the parties that the appellant is
appointed in one of the available posts of Commercial Tax Inspector, without
treating this as a precedent. Ordered accordingly. In order to avoid any future
dispute with regard to seniority, we make it clear that the appellant shall be
entitled to seniority only with effect from 1-8-2018. The appointment shall be
effected within four weeks from today. We also make it clear that in case the
appointment order is not issued to the appellant within four weeks from today,
for all purposes the appellant shall be deemed to have been appointed with effect
from 1-9-2018."
13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going
through documents available on record it appears that pursuant to the
Advertisement No. 11 of 2007 i.e. 3rd Combined Civil Services
Examination for appointment on the post of Deputy Collector and Deputy
Superintendent of Police and other post, the JPSC recommended the name
of successful candidates on 02.08.2010 and pursuant thereto their
appointment notification was published on 11.08.2010 in which the name
of these petitioners did not find any place and pursuant thereto, JPSC also
issued another Advertisement No. 07 of 2010 and process of 4 th Combined
Civil Services Examination started.
14. It further transpires that the petitioner no.1 after seeing the
result of 3rd Combined Civil Services Examination, 2008 came to know
that in Geography Paper No.1 she was awarded 24 marks by the examiner
but the same was not added in the total marks. Likewise, petitioner no.2
found that 7 marks were not added in the total marks of Anthropology
Paper-1. Accordingly, one of the petitioners knocked the door of this Court
in W.P.(C) No. 3532 of 2012 and this Court directed the JPSC to issue fresh
mark-sheet in favour of the petitioner no.2. Pursuant to the order passed by
this Court corrected mark-sheet was issued in favour of petitioner no.2
showing total marks as 781.8 marks in ST Category which was much
higher than the last selected and recommended candidate.
Likewise, petitioner no.1 was also issued corrected mark-
sheet and she secured 784 in SC category which was above last
selected/recommended candidate. Again, after the intervention of this
Court in W.P.(S) No. 3672 of 2012 and W.P.(S) No. 7598 of 2012 this Court
vide orders dated 03.01.2013 and 16.11.2013 respectively, directed the
JPSC to pass appropriate order with an observation that it was a serious
case of latches.
Subsequently, on 30.04.2013 the JPSC recommended the
names of the petitioners before the respondent no.2 for their appointment
on the post of Deputy Collector in 3rd Combined Civil Services
Examination in terms of Advertisement No.11 of 2007 and accordingly the
Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha
Government of Jharkhand vide Notification Nos. 4918 and 4919, both
dated 08.06.2013, appointed these petitioners on the post of Deputy
Collector with a rider that their seniority will be decided as per the
seniority list of the JPSC.
15. It further appears from record that provisional seniority list of
JPSC was published on 11.05.2020 wherein these petitioners filed
objection stating therein that fixation of their seniority at serial nos. 407
and 408 which are fixed after candidates who have been recommended for
appointment in 4th Combined Civil Services Examination is illegal; and
finally, these petitioners approached this Court for the aforesaid
rectification and correction in the seniority list, inasmuch as, they prayed
that their recommendation may be shifted from 30.04.2013 to 02.08.2010.
16. Having regard to the aforesaid factual scenario this Court is of
the considered view that the petitioners were never at fault for giving their
joining on 04.07.2013; rather both of them were fully entitled for
appointment/joining on 11.08.2010 itself and it was due to the latches on
the part of JPSC that the petitioners were forced to knock the door of this
Court for their appointment and it is only after the intervention of this
Court they were recommended for appointment by JPSC for which the
petitioners were never responsible.
It further transpires from record that the JPSC has accepted
their fault and recommended their names for appointment for the 3rd JPSC
Combined Examination; as such this Court holds that the petitioners are
fully entitled to the extent that the recommendation may be shifted from
30.04.2013 to 02.08.2010 and in pursuance to the shift in the date of
recommendation, the date of appointment of these petitioners may be
shifted from 08.06.2013 to 11.08.2010. The opinion of this Court is
fortified by following judgment:
In "C. Jayachandran v. State of Kerala & Ors." reported in
(2020) 5 SCC 230, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held at paragraph nos. 36
to 39 as under:
"36. In Sanjay Dhar [Sanjay Dhar v. J&K Public Service Commission, (2000) 8
SCC 182 : 2000 SCC (L&S) 1090] , a three-Judge Bench of this Court held as
under : (SCC p. 191, para 16)
"16. For the foregoing reasons the appeal is allowed. The judgment under
appeal is set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be deemed to have been
appointed along with other appointees under the appointment order dated 6-3-
1995 and assigned a place of seniority consistently with his placement in the
order of merit in the select list prepared by J&K PSC and later forwarded to the
Law Department."
37. In Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli [Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli v. State of A.P.,
(2014) 13 SCC 393 : (2015) 1 SCC (L&S) 407] , this Court held as under : (SCC
p. 397, para 13)
"13. For the reasons recorded in Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli v. State of
A.P. [Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli v. State of A.P., (2014) 13 SCC 393, paras 1-10 :
(2015) 1 SCC (L&S) 407] , the present appeals are allowed and it is directed
that the High Court as well as the respondent State will do the needful for giving
appointment to the appellant with retrospective effect i.e. from the date on which
she ought to have been appointed, however, she shall not be paid salary for the
period during which she has not worked as a District and Sessions Judge. We are
sure that the respondents will do the needful for the appointment of the appellant
at an early date."
38. In view of the above, the appellant having been participated in the same
selection process and in view of the direction of the Division Bench of the High
Court, was rightly placed by the High Court by giving him revised select list
placing him at Sl. No. 41 by pushing Badharudeen from general category
candidate to OBC category candidate at Sl. No. 42.
39. The appellant was wrongfully excluded from the process of appointment on
account of an illegal and arbitrary grant of moderation of marks. The
Government in its Order dated 22-12-2010 cancelled the appointment of three
District and Sessions Judges who were granted benefit of moderation.
Badharudeen was earlier assigned general category seat but since the appellant
was higher in merit, Badharudeen was pushed down and adjusted against OBC
category seat at Sl. No. 42. Badharudeen has not challenged his pushing down at
Sl. No. 42 either before the learned Single Bench of the High Court or before the
Division Bench of the High Court or even before this Court. Therefore, as
respondent, he cannot be permitted to dispute the grant of seniority to the
appellant at Sl. No. 41. The judgment referred to by the learned counsel is not
helpful to the arguments raised as the appellant therein sought seniority as direct
recruit from the time when the vacancies occurred. To raise such an argument,
reliance was placed upon judgment of this Court reported in Union of
India v. N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 : (2013)
3 SCC (L&S) 711] , wherein this Court held that a person is disentitled to claim
seniority from the date he was not borne in the service. The said finding is in the
context of the claim of the appellant to claim seniority from the date of
availability of the vacancies; whereas in the present case, the appellant is
claiming seniority from the date the other candidates in the same selection
process were appointed but the appellant is excluded on account of an illegal act
of the High Court of the moderation of marks. Therefore, the said judgment is not
of any help to the arguments raised."
17. At this stage it is also profitable to refer the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in "Sanjay Dhar v. J & K Public Service
Commission & Anr." reported in (2000) 8 SCC 182 wherein it has been
held at paragraph nos. 10, 14 and 16 as under:
"10. The main question arising for decision is: whether the certificate of practice
furnished by the appellant satisfied the requirement of Rule 9 and, if so, whether
the appellant was wrongfully denied the appointment in 1992-93 selections.
14. Rule 9 of the J&K Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules, 1967 must
receive a purposive interpretation. Purposive interpretation enables ascertaining
the purpose of enactment, the object sought to be achieved and the mischief
sought to be taken care of or prevented. The object of the Rule is to exclude
lawyers not in actual practice, and hence inexperienced, from entering judicial
service. At the same time the Rule cannot be so construed as to create an
anomalous situation by asking District Judge to certify period of practice of a
lawyer practising in High Court and not in District Courts, "based on his
personal knowledge or official records of District Courts"-- as J&K PSC
wanted the appellant to do. A literal compliance, if insisted on, may defeat the
object sought to be achieved by the Rule itself. If an advocate is practising
exclusively in the High Court, the District Judge would not have any material
available in his records to verify the factum and the period of actual practice of
any applicant. The Registrar of the High Court would be the best-suited person
to issue a certificate in that regard and since the Rule contemplates the requisite
certificate being issued by the District Judge, the underlying object sought to be
achieved by the Rule would be fulfilled if the certificate issued by the Registrar is
countersigned by the District Judge or the District Judge issues a certificate of
his own based on the certificate issued by the Registrar. In this view of the matter
the certificate dated 12-12-1992/17-3-1993 filed by the appellant before the J&K
PSC satisfied the requirement of Rule 9 abovesaid and the J&K PSC was not
justified in rejecting the application of the appellant holding him to be ineligible.
As the appellant participated in the process of selection protected by the interim
orders of the High Court and was also successful having secured third position
in the select list, he could not have been denied appointment. The appellant is,
therefore, fully entitled to the relief of his appointment being calculated w.e.f. the
same date from which the candidates finding their place in the order of
appointments issued pursuant to the select list prepared by the J&K PSC for
1992-93 were appointed and deserves to be assigned notionally a place in
seniority consistently with the order of merit assigned by the J&K PSC.
16. For the foregoing reasons the appeal is allowed. The judgment under appeal
is set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be deemed to have been
appointed along with other appointees under the appointment order dated 6-3-
1995 and assigned a place of seniority consistently with his placement in the
order of merit in the select list prepared by J&K PSC and later forwarded to the
Law Department. During the course of hearing the learned Senior Counsel for
the appellant made a statement at the Bar that the appellant was interested only
in having his seniority reckoned notionally in terms of this order and was not
claiming any monetary benefit by way of emoluments for the period for which he
would have served in case he would have been appointed by order dated 6-3-
1995. We record that statement and direct that the appellant shall be entitled
only to the benefit of notional seniority (and not monetary benefits) being given
to him by implementing this order. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. The
contesting respondents shall pay the appellant costs quantified at Rs 5000."
As a matter of fact, in the aforesaid case the Hon'ble Apex
Court has categorically held in para 16 that the appellant shall be deemed
to have been appointed along with other appointees under the original
appointment order and assigned the case of seniority consistently with
their placement in the order of merit in the select list prepared by the
Department. In yet another case in "Lakshman Rao Yadavalli & Anr. v.
State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors." reported in (2014) 13 SCC 393 wherein
at paragraph no.10, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the respondent-
State should give appointment to the appellants to the post in question with
effect from the date on which they ought to have been appointed.
Similar views have been reiterated in "Sasidhar Reddy Sura
v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors." reported in (2014) 2 SCC 158 (refer,
paragraph nos. 18 and 23), "Balwant Singh Narwal & Ors. v. State of
Haryana & Ors." reported in (2008) 7 SCC 728 (refer, paragraph nos. 8
to 10).
Further, in the case of "Pilla Sitaram Patrudu & Ors. v.
Union of India & Ors." reported in (1996) 8 SCC 637, the Hon'ble Apex
Court has categorically held that the appointment of such type of petitioner
was delayed due to latches on the part of the Department (refer, paragraph
nos. 2 and 3).
18. The judgment relied upon by the respondents is not applicable
in the facts and circumstances of this case, inasmuch as, the petitioners
were never at fault for giving their joining on 04.07.2013; rather it was due
to the latches on the part of JPSC and that the JPSC has accepted their
fault and recommended their names for appointment for the 3 rd JPSC
Combined Examination.
19. Having regard to the aforesaid discussion and the judicial
pronouncements, the instant writ application, deserves to be, and is hereby,
allowed. Accordingly, this Court issues following directions:
(i) The recommendation by JPSC be shifted from 30.04.2013
to 02.08.2010 and in pursuance to the shift in the date of
recommendation; the date of appointment of these petitioners be
shifted from 08.06.2013 to 11.08.2010.
(ii) Respondent nos. 1 to 4 are directed to prepare the
fresh/revised seniority list on the basis of the merit position of the
petitioners amongst the members of 3rd Combined Civil Services
Examination.
20. As a result, the instant writ application stands allowed and
disposed of in the manner indicated hereinabove. Pending I.As., if any,
stands closed.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated: 04 /10/2024
Amit
AFR/
