The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed a writ petition challenged before it as not maintainable for want of locus standi.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No.2342 of 2018
Ravindra Nath Mukherjee @ Ravi Mukherjee. .......... Petitioner.
-Versus-
.......... Respondents.
----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
----For the Petitioner : Mr. Rishi Pallava, Advocate For the State : A.C. to A.G. -----
Order No.04 Date: 16.07.2018
The petitioner, who claims himself to be the President of Jharkhand Home Guard Welfare Association, has filed the present writ petition for quashing and staying the operation of Advertisement No.01 of 2016 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition), whereby the vacancies have been notified for enrolment of home guards for Ranchi district in two categories; (i) Urban Home Guard-409 posts and (ii) Rural Home Guard-362 posts; total 771 vacancies, by the office of the respondent no.5-District Commandant, Jharkhand Home Guard, Ranchi.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
According to the petitioner, Advertisement No.01 of 2016 has been issued by the office of the respondent no.5 without publishing the Jharkhand Home Guard (Volunteer) Rules, 2014 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Rules 2014’) in the official gazette in terms with Section 12 of The Jharkhand Home Guard Act, 2005. Further grievance of the petitioner is that the Committee constituted for enrolment of home guards as per the impugned advertisement, consists of three members i.e. Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi and District Commandant, Jharkhand Headquarters, Ranchi. However, the respondent no.5, who is in-charge of the post of District Commandant, Home Guard, Ranchi is not holding the post
-2-
equivalent to Deputy Superintendent of Police and thus he is not a gazetted officer. The constitution of the said Committee is thus contrary to the provisions of Rule 4(1) of the Rules, 2014. The said information has been obtained by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Be that as it may. The petitioner has claimed himself to be the President of Jharkhand Home guard Welfare Association. The contention raised by him through the present writ petition indicates that the writ petition is primarily aimed against the respondent no.5. The petitioner, who is already an enrolled home guard and claims himself to be the President of the said association, has no locus standi to challenge the impugned advertisement before the writ Court. He is neither concerned nor aggrieved by any alleged infirmities committed by the respondent authorities in issuance of the impugned advertisement.
The writ petition is, thus, not maintainable and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Sanjay/
Ravindra Nath Mukherjee
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
