Dismissed

Chitra Patel v. the State of Jharkhand through the Pr Secretary Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajyabhasha

Jharkhand HC20 Jun 2022WPC/1193/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought directions to fill reserved seats for government school teachers with prior experience. The court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to file a representation before the competent authority within 15 days and directing an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to file a representation before Respondent No. 2 within 15 days; Respondent No. 2 to pass a reasoned order after hearing within one month.

Chitra Patel Vs the State of Jharkhand… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(S) No. 1193 of 2019

¶3

Chitra Patel, D/o Late Ramswarup Mandal Bidhubhusan Sarkar Road Barmashiya P.O. and P.S. Deoghar District-Deoghar aged about 28 years … … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Personnel administrative Reforms and Rajyabhasha, Govt. of Jharkhand having its office at Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi

¶6

Principal Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi

¶7

Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar having its office at Deoghar, P.O. and P.S. Deoghar, Dist. Deoghar

¶8

District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar having its office at Deoghar, P.O. and P.S. Deoghar, Dist. Deoghar

¶9

Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through its Secretary having its office at Chaibagan, Kalinagar, P.O. and P.S. Namkom, Dist.- Ranchi

¶10

Controller of Examination, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission having its office at Chaibagan, Kalinagar, P.O. and P.S. Namkom, Dist.- Ranchi … … Respondents

¶11

¶12

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶13

--For the Petitioner : Mr. Radha Krishna Gupta, Advocate For the Respondents(5,6) : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate For the State : Ms. Rashmi Lal, Advocate ---

¶14

9 /20.06.2022 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

¶15

2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

¶16

(i) For issuance of direction commanding upon the respondents to fill up the vacant seats which were kept reserved for Govt. School teachers in terms of Rule 9(i) of the Jharkhand Govt. High School Teacher and Teaching staff appointment and service condition rules, 2015.

¶17

(ii) For issuance of direction upon the respondents to show cause as to why the seats which were reserved for govt. school teachers having 5 years of teaching experience are not been filed in terms of the rule of the year 2015.

¶18

(iii) For issuance of direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the vacant posts which were kept vacant owing to the reservation as postulated under the Rule of the year 2015 in terms of Rule 9(i) of the said rule of the year 2015.

¶19

¶20

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had participated in the selection process pursuant to advertisement No. 21/2016 and as per terms and conditions of advertisement and particularly Rule 9 (i) of the rules of the year 2015, 25% of the total vacancy was reserved for the primary trained teachers who have working experience of 5 years and 75% was from direct recruitment. It was also mentioned that if the candidates for 25% seats are not available, then the candidates from open category would fill up those vacancies. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner had applied in open category and was also declared amongst the successful candidates but he could not be selected in 75% category as he was the next candidate after those who were finally selected. The learned counsel also submits that the 25% reserved post remained unfilled and therefore respondents were under legal obligation to fill up the same from amongst the direct candidates who have applied in 75% category. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment passed by this court in W.P. (S) No. 5700 of 2018 and other analogous cases and he refers to the prayer which has been quoted in the said judgment with respect to W.P. (S) No. 5700 of 2018 and W.P. (S) No. 3816 of 2019. He submits that similar relief is being sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition also and therefore the writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the said judgment. The learned counsel submits that in the aforesaid judgement, the recruitment process in the non-schedule areas has been directed to be concluded as per eligibility criteria and vacancy position, in accordance with law.

¶21

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 has submitted that he has come to know that the judgment passed by this court in W.P. (S) No. 5700 of 2018 and other analogous cases has been challenged but the number and other details is not available with the respondent. He has also submitted that the petitioner has not filed any representation before the respondents and accordingly the petitioner may be directed to approach respondent No. 2 and the respondent No. 2 may act in accordance with law.

¶22

¶23

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has also submitted that the respondent No. 2 would be the competent authority to take appropriate decision in the matter.

¶24

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid submissions made by the petitioner with regard to his claim in terms of the advertisement and also upon perusal of the judgment passed by this court in W.P. (S) No. 5700 of 2018 and other analogous cases , this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the respondent No. 2 within a period of 15 days from today along with a copy of the writ record as well as a copy of the judgment passed by this court in W.P. (S) No. 5700 of 2018. Upon filing of such representation, the respondent No. 2 is directed to pass a reasoned order in connection with the claim/entitlement of the petitioner in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his authorized representative within a period of one month from the date of filing of the representation. The reasoned order should be communicated to the petitioner through speed post at the address which may be provided by the petitioner in the representation itself. If the petitioner is found entitled to any relief, the same should also be extended to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of passing of the reasoned order.

¶25

7. Pending I.A., if any, is closed.

¶26

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶27

Binit

Chitra Patel v. the State of Jharkhand through the Pr Secretary Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajyabhasha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chitra Patel v. the State of Jharkhand through the Pr Secretary Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajyabhasha

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

Shakila Bano Vs the State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary

Karan Jaisawal Alias Karan Rout Alias Karan Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Noori Khatoon Alias Nuri Khatoon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bondada Man Mohan Rao And Ors. Vs Union Of India Through Ministry Of Coal And Ors.

Dr Rama Nand Sah Vs Health

Prof Krishna Ballabh Prasad Vs Human Resource Development