Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2945 Jhar
Judgement Date : 27 February, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 5640 of 2018
-----
Ajay Kumar Jha, S/o Late Bal Mukund Jha ------ Petitioner(s)
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand, through the Principal Secretary, School Education and
Literacy, Department, Government of Jharkhand
2.The Principal Secretary, Education and Literacy Department, Government of
Jharkhand
3.The Director, Secondary Education, Education and Literacy Department,
Government of Jharkhand
4.The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka
5.The District Education Officer, Godda ------ Respondent(s)
......
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------
For the Petitioner(s) : None For the Resp.-State : Mr. Soumya S. Pandey, AC to AAG-I .........
08 / 27.02.2025: No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.
2. Vide order dated 02.03.2020, this Court directed to list this case after disposal of LPA No.138 of 2019. The aforesaid Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) has been filed to challenge the order dated 05.09.2018 passed in W.P.(S) No.921 of 2011 and analogous cases.
3. In those batch of cases, prayer was made by respective petitioners for a direction to the authorities to recognize/ regularize their services by the Government following the take over of private school where the petitioners had been working and discharging their duties and retired on attaining the age of superannuation.
4. The writ applications were allowed with the direction to the School Education and Literacy, Department, Government of Jharkhand to consider the case of those petitioners taking into account the observations and directions of the Court for their regularization and absorption and also to pay the salaries with all consequential benefits. Considering the fact that those teachers have worked for almost thirty years.
5. LPA No.138 of 2019 and analogous cases were taken up for final hearing and ultimately vide judgment dated 19.01.2024, the Letters Patent Appeals was allowed and order dated 05th September, 2018 passed in W.P.(S) No.921 of 2011 and analogous cases was set aside. By setting aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No.921 of 2011 and analogous cases the Division Bench has held that there cannot be any regularization.
6. In this particular writ petition, the petitioner has also prayed for similar relief as was prayed by the petitioners in W.P.(S) No.921 of 2011 and analogous cases.
7. Since the Division Bench has already answered the issue, I find that no relief can be granted to the petitioners, in view of the Division Bench judgment passed in LPA No.138 of 2019 and analogous cases. This writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.
(ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!