Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 633 (JHR)

State of Jharkhand v. Marwari Sahu

2024-06-26

NAVNEET KUMAR, SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

body2024
JUDGMENT : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, A.C.J. I.A. No. 2183 of 2024 in L.P.A. No. 109 of 2024 With I.A. No. 2270 of 2024 in L.P.A. No. 113 of 2024 These interlocutory applications have been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 117 days and 153 days respectively. 2. We are satisfied with cause shown by the appellants in these applications and, therefore, the delays caused in preferring these Letters Patent Appeals are condoned. 3. Both the aforesaid interlocutory applications are, accordingly, allowed. L.P.A. No. 109 of 2024 With L.P.A. No. 113 of 2024 4. The State of Jharkhand is in appeal against the order dated 20th September 2023 passed in W.P.(S) No. 2005 of 2023 and order dated 23rd August 2023 passed in W.P.(S) No. 2360 of 2023 respectively. 5. The short question involved in these Letters Patent Appeals is whether the writ petitioners who were possessing degree from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar and had joined the service before an advertisement was issued for conducting Limited Competitive Examination have rightly been found entitled for appointment to the post of Deputy Collector. 6. Shorn of unnecessary details, suffice it would be to record that both the writ petitioners had obtained more marks than the last selected candidates of their respective category in the examination held pursuant to Advertisement No. 05 of 2005. Mr. Marwari Sahu, who was petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 2005 of 2023 had obtained a degree of Sahitya Alankar in the year 1997 and Mr. Rabi Kant Sharma, who was the petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 2360 of 2023 had also obtained a degree of Sahitya Alankar in the year 2003. This is also a matter of record that the State of Jharkhand issued a notification on 26th February 2015 pursuant to its decision that the degree obtained from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar shall not be considered valid w.e.f. 26th June 2014. However, the validity of the degree from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar continued to haunt the appointees and aspirants for appointment under the State of Jharkhand and a batch of petitions come to be filed in this Court. By judgment dated 10th May 2022 in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases, the Division Bench of this Court held as under: “19. By judgment dated 10th May 2022 in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases, the Division Bench of this Court held as under: “19. This Court, applying the ratio about retrospective applicability of executive instruction as has been settled in the judgment quoted hereinabove, is of the considered view that the decision of not providing validity to the degree issued by the Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar w.e.f. 26.06.2014 as per decision contained in communication dated 26.02.2015 cannot be allowed to make it effective w.e.f. 26.06.2014 i.e., with retrospective effect rather it will be held to be prospective i.e., after 26.02.2015 as such the certificate issued by Hindi Vidyapith up-to 26.02.2015 is held to be valid. 20. This Court, in view of discussions made hereinabove, and case laws laid down in the case of Pradip J. Mehta (supra) is of the view that judgment passed in the case of Ramashankar Patel (supra) since is on the similar fact of the case, and further since the same has been affirmed up-to Hon’ble Apex Court, is of the view that the same will have persuasive value, since the factual aspect of the given cases are similar, same and except the date of order issued by the State of Bihar or the State of Jharkhand, which are issued on different dates, as referred above. 21. This Court, therefore, is of the considered view that the order/judgment as has been passed by the Full Bench of Patna High Court, is required to be followed on the ground of similarity of facts and more particularly the entire facts rest upon Govt. Order which was issued by the erstwhile State of Bihar of the time when State was unified i.e. vide order dated 11.01.1991. Further, the State of Jharkhand also adopted the said decision dated 11.01.1991 by issuing order on 03.11.2003. 22. In view thereof, this Court held that the degree of ‘Praveshika’ ‘Sahitya Bhushan’ and ‘Sahitya Alankar has got equivalence to Matriculation, Intermediate and Graduation, as decided vide order dated 11.01.1991 by the General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, which was adopted by the State of Jharkhand vide order dated 03.11.2003, and as sucyh, the validity of order dated 11.01.1991 will be effective up-to 26.02.2015. 23. The degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar, are held to be vlaid up-to 26.02.2015. 23. The degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar, are held to be vlaid up-to 26.02.2015. It is clarified that no benefit is to be given on the basis of degrees issued by the institution in question, Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar, after 26.02.2015. 24. In consequence thereof, the petitioners are directed to approach before the respondents-authorities within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order for consequential benefit of promotion etc. Upon receipt/production of such order, the respondents-authorities shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law and on examining the facts of individual writ petitioner preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. Needless to say that if one or the other writ petitioners are found eligible, the benefits shall be granted within further period of three months from the date of such decision. However, in case of any adverse decision, the same shall be communicated to the individual petitioner within the aforesaid period.” 7. In the aforesaid background, the writ Court held that the writ petitioners could not have been denied appointment on the ground that they had obtained degree equivalent to Graduation from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar. 8. In view of the notification dated 26th February 2015 and the judgment passed in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases, this Court is not required to say anything more, and the Letter Patent Appeals filed by the State of Jharkhand are liable to be dismissed. However, Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned A.A.G-II submits that the appointees were undergoing training at the time the writ petitions were filed and now no post is vacant. We think that for this reason the appointment of meritorious candidates who had approached this Court in time cannot be declined and all that we intend to observe is that the State Government may create supernumerary posts for those candidates/appointees 9. L.P.A. No. 109 of 2024 and L.P.A. No. 113 of 2024 are dismissed. 10. I.A. No. 2184 of 2024 in L.P.A. No. 109 of 2024 and I.A. No. 2271 of 2024 in L.P.A. No. 113 of 2024 are also dismissed.