Dismissed

Md Najmul Hasan And Anr. v. Human Resources Department

Jharkhand HC10 Jul 2019WPC/3657/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the appointment of teachers at Madrasa Qumrul Hoda, alleging lack of transparency. The Court examined the recruitment process, finding advertisements published in newspapers and selection conducted via examination and interview with Jharkhand Academic Council approval. The Court dismissed the petition, finding no unfairness.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with no direction for new recruitment process.

Md Najmul Hasan And Anr. Vs Human… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI.

¶2

W.P. (C) No. 3657 of 2017

¶3

1.Md. Najmul Hasan,

¶4

2.Gaffar … … Petitioners

¶5

-V e r s u s-

¶6

1.The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Ranchi.

¶7

2.The Deputy Commissioner, Godda.

¶8

3.The District Education Officer, Godda.

¶9

4.The Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi.

¶10

5.Head Maulvi, Madrasa Qumrul Hoda, Sital.

¶11

6.Md. Samiruddin, Secretary, Madrasa Qumrul Hoda, Sital.… Respondents.

¶12

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

¶13

For the Petitioners : - Ms. Rukmini Kumari, Advocate. For the Respondent-State :- Mr. Akash Bhushan, A.C. to Sr.S.C. I. For the Respondent-JAC :- Mrs. Richa Sanchita, Advocate.

¶14

06/10.07.2019 This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder, the petitioners have sought for direction upon the respondents to start a new process for appointment of teachers in Madrasa Qumrul Hoda, Sital by adopting fair and transparent recruitment process.

¶15

It is the case of the petitioners that one Madrasa, namely, Madrasa Qumrul Hoda, Sital is running in the district of Godda, where and in order to fill up four posts of teachers, even though, the local peoples were waiting for their chance for their consideration but the process has been commenced without making it published in the daily newspaper. Thereafter, the selection process has proceeded and hence, the appointment made to the said post of teachers is not fair and transparent and hit the Article 16 of the Constitution of India.

¶16

Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Jharkhand Academic Council, wherein, inter alia, the ground has been taken that in pursuance to the letter dated 01.03.2016, issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, the Managing Committee of the said Madrasa for filling up the posts of Maulvi, Hafij, Inter Trained and Matric Trained Teachers has published an advertisement in the daily newspaper, “Dainik Bhaskar” and “Faruki Tanzim”, dated 02.08.2016 and 27.07.2016, notifying therein, to submit the applications for consideration of candidature of one of the other candidates by making

¶17

the applications up to 18.08.2016 and accordingly, the applications have been submitted.

¶18

After the closure date of receiving of the applications, six candidates have been found to make their applications and they have been directed to go for written examination followed by the Interview, which was conducted on 21.08.2016 by the experts and it is only thereafter, a meeting was convened on 27.08.2016 vide Resolution No. 29, in which the decision was taken to send the three names of each posts, who have got the highest, second highest and the third highest marks to the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi and in pursuance thereto, the names have been sent and thereafter, the selection has been made after getting the approval from the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi vide letter no. JAC/Madrasa/237/4785/16, dated 24.11.2016 and in pursuance thereto, the appointment of the four teachers in the said posts have been finalized and therefore, what has been contended by the petitioners in the writ petition is not correct, since, there is no unfairness and non-transparency in the process.

¶19

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on appreciation of their rival submissions, this Court does not in dispute that in the matter of recruitment in fulfilling the public posts, the requirement casted upon the recruiting agency to adopt fair and transparent policy, then only the same will be said to be in consonance with the Article 16 to the Constitution of India.

¶20

Article 16 to the Constitution of India provides to provide equal opportunity in the matter of public appointment and the said equal opportunity will only be said to have been extended in favour of the candidates, if there would be wide publication in the daily newspaper.

¶21

In the context of that settled position, the factual aspect, which has been pleaded by the parties has been considered, wherefrom, it is evident that the petitioners have alleged that there is unfair and nontransparent policy in making appointment of teachers in the said Madrasa.

¶22

Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi has filed counter affidavit by serving a copy of the same upon the learned counsel representing the petitioner, but no rebuttal to that has been filed.

¶23

In the counter affidavit, it transpires to this Court that the paper publication for inviting applications to fill the four posts has been made, i.e. in the “Dainik Bhaskar” (Hindi Edition) and “Faruki Tanzim” (Urdu) on 02.08.2016 and 27.07.2016.

¶24

In pursuance to the said Notice/Advertisement, the applications have been received and thereafter, the candidates have been directed to participate in the written examination followed by interview and basing upon which, the merit list has been prepared and the said list has been sent before the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, since the Council is the competent authority to approve the selection to the post of teachers. The Council has convened a meeting and thereafter, the appointment has been approved, as would appear from the reference of letter made at paragraph no. 12 to the counter affidavit bearing letter no. JAC/Madrasa/237/-4785/16, dated 24.11.2016 and in consequence to the said order of approval, the appointments have been made and the posts have been filled up.

¶25

In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the Council in the counter affidavit, it cannot be said that the stipulation, as has been mandated under Article 16 to the Constitution of India has not been followed, rather, the applications have been invited by making it wide publication in two daily newspapers, i.e. one “Dainik Bhaskar” (Hindi Edition) and “Faruki Tanzim” (Urdu Edition). Thereafter, the process has been followed under the auspices of the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi and thereafter, the selection has been made.

¶26

In view of such factual aspect, this Court is of the view that there is no unfair and non-transparent recruitment to warrant any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶27

In view thereof, this writ petition fails and it is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶28

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶29

APK

Md Najmul Hasan And Anr. v. Human Resources Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md Najmul Hasan And Anr. v. Human Resources Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prabhash Kumar Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Most Gulabi Vs Mohan Mahto

Anjay Sarawgi Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Deputy Commissioner Ranchi And Ors.

Tara Devi Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Subhagya Chandra Das Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

MD Javed Jamal Vs Jharkhand State Housing Board through Its Secretary