Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1627 (JHR)

Sangita Kumari v. State of Jharkhand

2012-11-08

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, PRAKASH TATIA, R.R.PRASAD

body2012
JUDGMENT A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners stating therein that against the Full Bench judgment of this Court dated 7th May, 2008 passed in W.P.(S) No. 4259 of 2005 and connected matters, Special Leave to Appeal was filed, which has been admitted and converted into Civil Appeal Nos. 3632-3634 of 2011, wherein even after grant of leave by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 18th September, 2012 dismissed the stay petition filed by the State, copy of which has been placed as Annexure-3 of the Supplementary Affidavit. In view of above, the State may be directed to comply with the direction contained in the Full Bench Judgment dated 7th May, 2008. 2. Learned Advocate General submitted that it is true that stay petition has been dismissed but the Hon'ble Supreme Court made it clear that appointments, if made, shall be subject to final result of the appeals, obviously pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being Civil Appeal Nos. 3632-3634. 3. Be that as it may be, now the State is directed to issue the appointment letters mentioning therein that the appointment is subject to final result of the Civil Appeals pending in the Supreme Court. 4. Learned Advocate General submitted that the process of appointment, after verification of the relevant documents, has already been started and it is expected that this process of giving actual appointment will be completed within a period of two weeks from today. 5. In view of the said statement of learned Advocate General, these contempt petitions are disposed of. I.A. No. 2968 of 2012 6. It is also made clear that writ petitioner, Md. Sajjad Ali, who filed W.P.(S) No. 4259 of 2005, has not filed any contempt petition, but learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the State may be directed to consider his also. 7. Learned Advocate General submitted cases of all the candidates will be considered, who are covered under Full Bench Judgment. Therefore, the petition filed by applicant, Md. Sajjad Ali, is misplaced one. 8. In view of statement made by learned Advocate General I.A. No. 2968 of 2012 also stand disposed of. Petition disposed of.