Disposed

Jitendra Malto And Anr. v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC9 Feb 2021WPC/6950/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking appointment as Assistant Class III Posts based on Scheduled Tribe status, the Court did not decide the merits. It directed petitioners to file a joint representation before the Respondent No.4 within two months, to be disposed of by a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioners to file a joint representation with documents before Respondent No.4 within two months for disposal via a reasoned order.

Jitendra Malto And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand And… — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 6950 of 2011

¶2

¶3

Jitendra Malto

¶4

Sobna Paharia

¶5

..… Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand

¶8

The Special Secretary of the State of Jharkhand

¶9

The Under Secretary, Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand

¶10

The Deputy Commissioner, District Pakur, Jharkhand

¶11

The District Welfare Officer, Pakur, Jharkhand

¶12

….. Respondents

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶14

--------For the Petitioners : Mr. J.P. Jha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sreenu Garapati, Advocate

¶15

06/09.02.2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

¶16

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners praying for a direction upon the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioners on the post of Assistant (Class III Posts) in the district of Pakur Collectorate on the basis of direct appointment of the petitioners who belongs to Scheduled Tribe community.

¶17

3. Mr. J.P. Jha, learned Senior Counsel draws attention of this court to Annexure 1/1A along with Annexure 2 series and submits that names of the petitioners were duly recommended by the concerned officer before the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur. However, the respondents sat tight over the matter and in the counter affidavit they have taken a stand that in view of the notification as contained in Memo No. 83 dated 15.01.2010; the provision of direct appointment of Scheduled Tribe community does not remain in force and is not effective.

¶18

Mr. Jha further submits that even after 2010, the respondents have adopted pick and chose method and appointed several persons, which is apparent from Annexure 2 series. Learned counsel contended that the concerned Deputy Commissioner may be directed take a decision in the matter of appointment of these petitioners.

¶19

-2-

¶20

4. Mr. Sreenu Garapati, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the provision of direct appointment of educated members of Adim Jan Jati has been made for the time being but later on it became ineffective from the date of Circular dated 27.3.2010. However, he fairly submits that no specific order has been passed in the case of the petitioners and if the case of the petitioner is on similar footing with the other persons who has been appointed as alleged by learned counsel for the petitioners by referring to Annexure 2 series, then their case shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶21

5. In view of the aforesaid facts and limited submission of the parties, the instant application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to file a joint representation annexing all relevant documents before Respondent No.4 raising their grievance within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶22

If any such representation is filed; the same shall be disposed of by a reasoned and speaking order taking into consideration all the grounds taken by the petitioners in their representation.

¶23

6. With the aforesaid observation and direction the instant writ application stands disposed of.

¶24

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶25

sm/

Jitendra Malto And Anr. v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Malto And Anr. v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramakant Ram Vs State of Jharkhand

Narendra Jha and Anr. Vs Jharkhand State Electricity Board

Surendra Kumar Sinha Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Rakesh Roshan Vs M/S Central Coalfields Limited

Dr.Sunil Kumar Sinha Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Anu Ram and Ors. Vs Chief Secretory