Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1692 (JHR)

Razi Ahmed v. State Of Jharkhand

2018-08-01

S.N.PATHAK

body2018
JUDGMENT S. N. Pathak, J. - In all these writ petitions, similar issues are involved, hence, they are being heard together and disposed of with this common order. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the short fact of the case is that the petitioners were working as para-teachers in different districts of Jharkhand. Pursuant to Advertisement floated for appointment to the post of Inter Trained Teachers for Class-I to V, the petitioners having the requisite qualifications, applied for the same under non-para category. In the advertisement itself it has been mentioned that 50% vacancies were reserved for para teachers whereas, rest of the vacancies were earmarked for non-para category candidates and as such, there was no restriction to para-teacher to apply under non-para category. It is the case of the petitioners that they successfully competed in the recruitment process and were called for counseling for the purpose of verification of their testimonials and educational certificates. But on that fateful day, they were informed that their candidatures have been cancelled on the ground that they have applied and qualified under the non-para category suppressing the fact that they all belong to para-teacher category. 3. Aggrieved thereto, they represented before the respondent-authorities but all in vain. Left with no option, the petitioners have approached this Court for redressal of their grievances At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that these writ applications are squarely covered by the order passed on 11.05.2018 by the Division Bench of this Hon''ble Court in L.P.A. No. 186 of 2017 (Pawan Singh Choudhary and Others. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others.) and another case. Learned counsel further submits that these cases may be disposed of in terms of orders passed in the aforesaid case. 4. On the other hand, Mr. D.K. Dubey, learned Sr. SC-I assisted by other counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State very fairly submits that issues involved in this writ petition has already been decided on 11.05.2018 by the Division Bench of this Hon''ble Court in L.P.A. No. 186 of 2017 (Pawan Singh Choudhary and Others. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others.) and another case and the present writ petitions may be disposed of in view of order passed in above mentioned cases. Mr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others.) and another case and the present writ petitions may be disposed of in view of order passed in above mentioned cases. Mr. Dubey further argues that fresh counseling can only be organized if sufficient number of vacancies exists and in case of no vacancy pursuant to advertisement in question, it is not possible for the State to take steps for fresh counseling of these petitioners. 5. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, these writ applications are being disposed of in terms of the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Hon''ble Court in L.P.A. No. 186 of 2017 (Pawan Singh Choudhary and Others. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others.) and another case and if the cases of the present petitioners are found same and similar to the cases of the petitioners in L.P.A. No. 186 of 2017 (Pawan Singh Choudhary and Others. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others.) and another case and if the seats are lying vacant, the present petitioners are also entitled for the same benefits. The Division of the this Hon''ble Court in L.P.A. No. 186 of 2017 has held that, "We, hereby, direct the respondent-State to initiate the counselling of the original petitioners, as early as, possible and practicable, so that it can be completed within a period of four months from today." 6. Accordingly, I hereby direct the respondent-authorities to verify the factual aspects/ issues involved in the present writ petitions vis--vis factual aspects/ issues involved in L.P.A. No. 186 of 2017 (Pawan Singh Choudhary and Others. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others.) and another case and if the facts/ issues involved in the present writ petitions are found to be similar to the aforementioned writ petitions, the same benefits may be extended to the present writ petitioners also, in accordance with law, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observations, these writ petitions stand disposed of.