Allowed

Mahesh Prasad Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Sept 2018LPA/160/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal where Para Teachers were denied participation in Assistant Teacher selection. Relying on a prior Bench decision, the Court set aside the lower court's rejection, ruling that appellants participated under general category rules without exclusive benefits. Orders counselling initiation within four months.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the First Court's decision and directed the State to initiate counselling within four months of the date of order.

Mahesh Prasad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Education and Admissions | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

L. P. A. No. 160 of 2018 With

¶3

I.A. No. 6475 of 2018

¶4

Mahesh Prasad Singh, S/o Late Gajanan Singh, R/o VillageKatani, P.O-Kalyanpur, P.S.-Barwadda, District-Dhanbad

¶5

Dinesh Kumbhkar, S/o Satish Kumbhkar, R/o Village-Korahir, P.O & P.S.-Baliapur, District-Dhanbad

¶6

Bikash Kumar Rawani, S/o Late Hari Rawani, R/o VillageChhota Kolahariya, P.O-Bamandiha, P.S.-Sarath, DistrictDeoghar

¶7

Bhagwat Rajwar, S/o Hublal Rajwar, R/o Village-Sindurpur, Chowktand, P.O & P.S.-Baliapur, District-Dhanbad

¶8

Om Prakash Singh, S/o Ghanshyam Singh, R/o VillageUdaypur, P.O-Kalyanpur, P.S.-Barwadda, District-Dhanbad

¶9

Amrit Kumar Mandal, S/o Jaypati Mandal, R/o Village-Palani, P.O & P.S.-Baliapur, District-Dhanbad

¶10

Rajiv Kumar Dutta, S/o Ram Chandra Dutta, R/o VillageChihutiya, P.O-Gokula, P.S.-Narayanpur, District-Jamtara

¶11

Vidya Chandra Mandal, S/o Late Bhakti Pad Mandal, R/o Village-Pabya, P.O-Ankduara, P.S.-Nirsha, District-Dhanbad

¶12

Bipin Kumar Dutta, S/o Subal Chandra Dutta, R/o Village & P.O.-Chainpur, P.S.-Narayanpur, District-Jamtara

¶13

Kirtan Chandra Barat, S/o Ratan Chandra Barat, R/o VillageKulbera, P.O.-Kalyanpur, P.S.-Barwadda, District-Dhanbad

¶14

Prem Chand Mahto, S/o Late Moti Lal Mahto, R/o, Chhoto Jamua, P.O-Tilaiya, P.S.-Barwadda, District-Dhanbad

¶15

Shankar Kishore Mahto, S/o Kapil Chand Mahato, R/o Village-Manaidih, P.O.-Tilaiya, P.S.-Barwadda, DistrictDhanbad

¶16

Umesh Kumar Mahto, S/o Bhagirath Mahto, R/o VillageMohanpur, P.O-Pradhankhanta, P.S.-Baliapur, DistrictDhanbad

¶17

Anand Modak, S/o Haribol Modak, R/o Village-Brahmandiha, P.O.-Pradhankhanta, P.S.-Baliapur, District-Dhanbad

¶18

Chandradip Kumar, S/o Chitamani Saw, R/o VillageKandaber, P.O-Kandaber, P.S.-Keredari, District-Hazaribagh

¶19

Chhotelal Saw, S/o Jageshwar Saw, R/o Village-Beltu, P.OKandaber, P.S.-Keredari, District-Hazaribagh

¶20

Mahendra Kumar Mahto, S/o Mohan Mahto, R/o VillageGanduwa, Baijkartand, P.O-Chandour, P.S.-Tetulmari, District-Dhanbad

¶21

Uttam Kumar Mandal, S/o Late Bharat Chandra Mandal, R/o Village-Kanko, P.O.-Kanko Math, P.S.-Katras, DistrictDhanbad .… Appellants Versus

¶22

The State of Jharkhand

¶23

The Secretary, Department of Personnel, Rajbhasa and Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, PO & PS Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand

¶24

The Director, Primary Education (Directorate of Education) Department of Personnel, Rajbhasa and Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O & P.S.Doranda, District-Ranchi

¶25

The District Superintendent of Education, Ramgarh, P.O, P.S. and District-Ramgarh

¶26

¶27

1. The District Superintendent of Education, Bokaro, P.O, P.S. and District-Bokaro

¶28

The District Superintendent of Education, Giridih, P.O, P.S. and District-Giridih

¶29

The District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh, P.O, P.S. and District-Hazaribagh

¶30

The District Superintendent of Education, Chatra, P.O, P.S. and District-Chatra

¶31

The District Superintendent of Education, Pakur, P.O, P.S. and District-Pakur

¶32

Pradip Kumar Mandal, S/o Dhirendra Nath Mandal, R/o Village-Kariatand, P.O.-Kalyanpur, P.S.-Barwadda, District-Dhanbad

¶33

… Respondents

¶34

¶35

CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH

¶36

------For the Appellants : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondents-State : Mr. Kaustav Roy, Advocate

¶37

¶38

Order No. 6 : Dated 04^th September, 2018 I.A. No. 6475 of 2018

¶39

This Interlocutory Application is for condonation of delay of 6 days in filing the appeal.

¶40

We have gone through the application for condonation of delay and find that there was sufficient cause for which the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time.

¶41

We, accordingly, condone the delay of 6 days in filing the appeal.

¶42

I.A. No. 6475 of 2018 stands disposed of.

¶43

L. P. A. No. 160 of 2018

¶44

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶45

The appellants’ plea for being permitted to participate in the selection process for the posts of Assistant Teachers through the general category has been rejected by the learned First Court on the ground that the appellants were Para Teachers. A Bench decision of this Court in the case of Pawan Singh Choudhary and others Vs. The State of Jharkhand and others (L.P.A. No. 186 of 2017) decided on 11^th May, 2018 has found the issue in favour of the applicant para-teachers in that case in a near identical situation. We enquired from the learned counsel for the State as to whether the aforesaid Bench decision was appealed

¶46

-3-

¶47

against or not and he answered in the negative. Learned counsel for the State could not bring to our notice any distinguishing feature involved in this appeal which could have had persuaded us to take a different view. In such circumstances, the points raised in this appeal stand squarely covered by the Bench decision in favour of the appellants.

¶48

Learned counsel for the appellants has also submitted before us that the applications of his clients were made in terms of the Rules prescribed for the general category candidates and his clients did not obtain any benefit specially preserved for “Para Teachers” category.

¶49

We accordingly, set aside the decision of the learned First Court, which is under appeal, and direct the respondent-State to initiate counselling of the appellants as early as possible so that the same can be completed within a period of four months from today.

¶50

The appellants shall approach or remain present before the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district on any working day not later than 12 weeks from today and if they approach the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district, the counselling exercise shall be completed within the period prescribed by us.

¶51

The appeal stands allowed in the above terms, without any order as to costs.

¶52

(Aniruddha Bose, C.J.)

¶53

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

¶54

Satayendra/Amardeep

Mahesh Prasad Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Prasad Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms Foundry Of India Through Its Partner Smt Rashmi Arya Vs Hindustan Copper Limited

Karan Gope and Ors. Vs Shri Akhilesh Sinha and Anr.

Keshwar Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand Thr the Pr Secretary Deptt of Human Resources Development And Ors.

Bhairav Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Commissioner of Income Tax Jam Vs Prem Dhar Pandey

Ms Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director and Ors. Vs Tapeshwar Das