Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 781 (JHR)

Deenanath Ram v. State of Jharkhand

2013-07-03

N.N.TIWARI

body2013
ORDER In I.A. no.3841 of 2013, the petitioners have prayed for fixing an early date of hearing and disposal of W.P.(S) no.3450 of 2011 in terms of the order passed in W.P.(S) no.5161 of 2009[Sukhdeo Gope Vrs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.]. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the order of this Court passed in the case of Sukhdeo Gope(supra) and the same be disposed of in terms of the said order. 3. Learned J.C. to Sr. S.C.I, appearing on behalf of the respondents, though has not opposed for disposal of the writ petition, submitted that the facts of the case are somewhat different from the case of Sukhdeo Gope(supra). 4. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is also heard and is being disposed of by this order. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners' claim for regularization/recognition of the service has been rejected on the ground that they acquired qualification of training after their appointment. In the similar case of Sukhdeo Gope(supra), this Court directed the respondents to recognize his services, as he had acquired B.Ed. degree much prior to the date of submission of the report by the Screening Committee. The petitioners' case is fully covered by the said decision of this Court, as they had also acquired the qualification of training much before the date of submission of the report by the Committee on 30th September, 2007. 6. Learned J.C. to Sr. S.C.II, appearing on behalf of the respondents, opposed the writ petition on the ground that the petitioners were appointed in 1985 and before that the School was selected as Project School. However, learned counsel has not disputed that the petitioners acquired their qualification of training much before the date of submission of report by the Screening Committee. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the facts and materials on record, I find that the petitioners' case is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Sukhdeo Gope(supra). The petitioners had also acquired qualification of training much before the date, the report was submitted by the Screening Committee. 8. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the facts and materials on record, I find that the petitioners' case is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Sukhdeo Gope(supra). The petitioners had also acquired qualification of training much before the date, the report was submitted by the Screening Committee. 8. Considering the above, I.A. no.3841 of 2013 as well as the writ petition are disposed of quashing the observation of the Three Men Committee so far as the petitioners are concerned and directing the respondents to pass order of regularization/recognition of the services of the petitioners in terms of the order of this Court passed in W.P.(S) no.5161 of 2009[Sukhdeo Gope Vrs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.]. The said respondents shall also pass order for the consequential benefits admissible to the petitioners including payment of salary in view of the Government circular dated 04.02.1989 and the said order of this Court.