Dismissed¶¶26

Horil Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Jan 2024WPC/413/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

None granted; the petitioner may approach the appropriate respondent only if he had made a representation during his service tenure praying for exemption from the examinations.

Horil Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None granted; the petitioner may approach the appropriate respondent only if he had made a representation during his service tenure praying for exemption from the examinations.

¶¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who has completed 22 years of service with a clean record and no criminal or departmental punishment, is entitled to grant of ACP benefit, notwithstanding that he has not passed the departmental Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination and one of the tribal language examinations.

¶¶18

Court's answer

Treating the petitioner's failure to pass as an admitted position, since the petitioner has not passed the required departmental Hindi noting and drafting examination coupled with one of the tribal language examinations, no relief can be granted to him on his prayer for ACP benefit.

¶¶24

Key takeaways

Conditional avenue preserved alongside dismissal: if the petitioner had during his service tenure made a representation praying for exemption from the departmental Hindi noting and drafting examination and one of the tribal language examination, then he can approach the appropriate respondent to look into the matter.obiter¶¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(S) No. 413 of 2018, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Deepak Roshan, J.; 09.01.2024) — Horil Singh v. The State of Jharkhand and five Panchayati Raj functionaries. The petitioner prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities to grant ACP benefit as per the prevalent rule of grant of ACP, being due after completion of 22 years of service with a clean record and no criminal-case or departmental-proceeding punishment. Counsel for the petitioner acknowledged the State's counter-affidavit stand (paras 10 and 12 invoked by counsel for the respondent State) that the petitioner had not passed the departmental Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination and one of the tribal language examination — characterised by counsel as a condition precedent for gazetted and non-gazetted employees of the State Government — and noted a provision in the rule allowing exemption on application to the competent authority, while conceding ignorance of any such application. Held: treating the non-passage of the required examinations as an admitted position, no relief can be granted; however, if during his service tenure the petitioner had made a representation praying for exemption from those examinations, he can approach the appropriate respondent to look into the matter. Application dismissed.

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(S) No. 413 of 2018

¶4

Horil Singh ..… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

The Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj/NREP, Govt. of Jharkhand,

¶8

P.O.-Dhurwa, P.S.-Jagarnathpur, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand

¶9

Commissioner North Chota Nagpur Division, Hazaribag, Jharkhand

¶10

Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribag, Jharkhand

¶11

District Panchayati Raj Officer, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand

¶12

Block Development Officer Bishnugarh, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand

¶13

..... Respondents

¶14

¶15

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶16

--------For the Petitioner : Mr. Lalan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Advocate Mr. H.K. Mehta, Advocate

¶17

11/ 09.01.2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner praying for a direction upon the respondent authorities to grant ACP benefit to the petitioner as per the prevalent rule of grant of ACP as the same is due to be granted but the petitioner has not received ACP after completion of 22 years of service period in spite of clean service record as the petitioner is not guilty and has not been punished either in criminal case or any departmental proceeding.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a counter affidavit has been filed in this case in which a stand has been taken by the State that petitioner has not passed the departmental Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination and one of the tribal language examination which is the condition precedent for gazetted and non-gazetted employee of the State Government and since the petitioner has not fulfilled these three conditions, therefore, the case of the petitioner has not been considered.

¶20

He further submits that there is also a provision in the rule that any person who has not passed the departmental Hindi noting and drafting examination he may be exempted from the said examination provided he applies before the competent authority and he is not having any instruction as to whether the petitioner has ever applied before the competent authority for exemption; as such this case may be disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner that if at all he has made any representation during his tenure of service then his case may be considered.

¶21

Learned counsel for the respondent State referred para 10 and 12 of the

¶22

¶23

counter affidavit and submits that the petitioner did not pass the departmental Hindi noting and drafting examination and one of the tribal language examination as such this case may be dismissed without any interference.

¶24

Having regard to the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the admitted position that the petitioner has not passed required departmental Hindi noting and drafting examination coupled with one of the tribal language examinations; as such, no relief can be granted to this petitioner. However, if at all petitioner has made any representation during his service tenure making a prayer for exemption from departmental Hindi noting and drafting examination and one of the tribal language examination then in that case he can approach before appropriate respondent to look into the matter.

¶25

Accordingly, the instant application stands dismissed.

¶26

Pramanik/

Horil Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Horil Singh 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Oraon Vs State of Jharkhand

Vikash Kumar Vs Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Home Affair

Hardu Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Om Prakash Thakur Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjoy Kumar Chaudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand Thr the Pr Secretary School Education and Literacy Department

Ganesh Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand Thr the Pr Secretary School Education and Literacy Department