MD Ismail Ashrafi Vs the State of Jharkhand

---------- CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK For the Petitioner : Mr. Arbind Kumar, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Suraj Prakash, AC to SC-VII

¶13

05/ 05.03.2024 Heard the parties.

¶14

Petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents for issuance of appointment letter on the post of Trained Urdu Assistant Teacher in Sahebganj, District as he has obtained more marks then the last selected candidate in the Sahebganj District.

¶15

At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner draws attention of this Court towards the judgment delivered by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 with analogous matters and submits that the Division Bench has held that the decision of not providing validity to the degree issued by the Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar with effect from 26.6.2014 (communication to which was made on 26.2.2015) cannot be allowed to make it effective from 26.6.2014, and the degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar, are held to be valid up-to 26.02.2015. Therefore, learned counsel submits that the impugned order dated 23.4.2016 cancelling the appointment of the petitioner is not tenable in the eyes of law, inasmuch as, the petitioner has obtained the degree of Intermediate much prior thereto i.e. in the year 2010. As such, the impugned order is fit to be quashed and set aside.

¶16

Per contra, counter affidavit has not been filed. However, learned counsel for the respondents submits that since the issue involved in the present writ petition has already been set at rest by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015, it remains nothing new to bring on record before this Court.

¶17

-2-

¶18

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the records, this Court is of the considered view that admittedly the petitioner has obtained the Sahityaalkar degree equivalent to Graduation in the year 2009. The petitioner was declared successful against the post of Trained Urdu Assistant Teacher. However, appointment letter was not issued to him only on the basis of circular/letter dated 26.02.2015 issued by the Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department. The State Government has de-recognized the degree granted by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar with retrospective effect i.e. even prior to issuance of this letter, making the degree to be invalid for any purpose including appointment and promotion in Government services. Now, the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 and other analogous matters has clearly held that the certificate issued by Hindi Vidyapith up-to 26.02.2015 is held to be valid. The relevant paras-19 to 24 are quoted herein below:-

¶19

“19. This Court, applying the ratio about retrospective applicability of executive instruction as has been settled in the judgment quoted hereinabove, is of the considered view that the decision of not providing validity to the degree issued by the Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar w.e.f. 26.06.2014 as per decision contained in communication dated 26.02.2015 cannot be allowed to make it effective w.e.f. 26.06.2014 i.e., with retrospective effect rather it will be held to be prospective i.e., after 26.02.2015 as such the certificate issued by Hindi Vidyapith up-to 26.02.2015 is held to be valid.

¶20

20. This Court, in view of discussions made hereinabove, and case laws laid down in the case of Pradip J. Mehta (supra) is of the view that judgment passed in the case of Ramashankar Patel (supra) since is on the similar fact of the case, and further since the same has been affirmed up-to Hon’ble Apex Court, is of the view that the same will have persuasive value, since the factual aspect of the given cases are similar, same and except the date of order issued by the State of Bihar or the State of Jharkhand, which are issued on different dates, as referred above.

¶21

21. This Court, therefore, is of the considered view that the order/judgment as has been passed by the Full Bench of Patna High Court, is required to be followed on the ground of similarity of facts and more particularly the entire facts rest upon Govt. Order which was issued by the erstwhile State of Bihar of the time when State was unified i.e. vide order dated 11.01.1991. Further, the State of Jharkhand also adopted the said decision dated 11.01.1991 by issuing

¶22

-3-

¶23

order on 03.11.2003.

¶24

22. In view thereof, this Court held that the degree of ‘Praveshika’ ‘Sahitya Bhushan’ and ‘Sahitya Alankar has got equivalence to to Matriculation, Intermediate and Graduation, as decided vide order dated 11.01.1991 by the General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, which was adopted by the State of Jharkhand vide order dated 03.11.2003, and as such, the validity of order dated 11.01.1991 will be effective up-to 26.02.2015.

¶25

23. The degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar, are held to be valid up-to 26.02.2015.

¶26

It is clarified that no benefit is to be given on the basis of degrees issued by the institution in question, Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar, after 26.02.2015.

¶27

24. In consequence thereof, the petitioners are directed to approach before the respondents-authorities within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order for consequential benefit of promotion etc. Upon receipt/production of such order, the respondents-authorities shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law and on examining the facts of individual writ petitioner preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. Needless to say that if one or the other writ petitioners are found eligible, the benefits shall be granted within further period of three months from the date of such decision. However, in case of any adverse decision, the same shall be communicated to the individual petitioner within the aforesaid period.”

¶28

In view of the observations of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 and other analogous matters, the petitioner cannot be debarred from appointment as the petitioner has obtained the Graduation degree i.e. Sahityaalkar from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar much prior to 26.02.2015 i.e. in the year 2009.

¶29

As a sequitur to the aforesaid rules, guidelines and judicial pronouncement, the Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj is direction to issue appointment letter to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶30

8 . The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶31

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)

¶32

Rohit/-

MD Ismail Ashrafi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Ismail Ashrafi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagwan Singh Vs The General Manager Kusunda Area Of Gondudih Colliery Of Ms B C C L

Dhirendra Kumar Roy Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukteshwar Datta Singh Vs Jharkhand State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

Bhuwan Bhaskar Vs Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences through Its Director

Jagannath Tripathy Vs Health

Sewa Lal Vs the Khadi and Village Industries Commission through Its Chief Executive Officer and Ors.