Disposed

Kumari Neelam Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Jan 2024WPC/4160/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition sought direction for special counselling for appointment as TGT. JSSC stated that after preparation of the state-wise merit list per the Supreme Court's judgment, the petitioner's name was recommended for appointment under BC-II category; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner recommended by JSSC vide letter no.1695 dated 17.10.2023 for appointment as TGT (Biology & Chemistry) under BC-II category; writ petition disposed of.

Kumari Neelam Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No.4160 of 2019

¶2

¶3

Kumari Neelam Mahto .......... Petitioner.

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

State of Jharkhand

¶6

The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶7

The Director, Secondary Education, Department of Education and Literacy, Ranchi.

¶8

The Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi.

¶9

Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh.

¶10

District Superintendent of Education, Ramgarh.

¶11

.......... Respondents.

¶12

¶13

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶14

¶15

For the Petitioner : None For the State : Mr. Suraj Prakash, A.C. to S.C.VII For JSSC : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate -----

¶16

Order No.07 Date: 09.01.2024

¶17

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to consider the petitioner’s representations dated 24^th June, 2019 and 1^st July, 2019 and to give her a chance to participate in counselling by holding a special counselling, as she comes in the zone of consideration.

¶18

Reference may be made to the order dated 2^nd January, 2024, which reads as under:-

¶19

“1. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner on repeated calls.

¶20

2. Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-JSSC is directed to apprise this Court as to whether the petitioner has come in the zone of consideration for appointment in the concerned subject after preparation of state-wise merit list in terms with the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Satyajit Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors., reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 954 read with the orders passed in Contempt Petition (Civil) No.612 of 2022 (Soni Kumari Vs. K. Ravi Kumar). 3. Put up this case under the heading “For Orders” on 9^th January, 2024.”

¶21

-2-

¶22

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-JSSC on instruction submits that after preparation of state-wise merit list in terms with the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Satyajit Kumar & Ors. (Supra.) , the petitioner came in the zone of consideration and her name has been recommended vide letter no.1695 dated 17^th October, 2023 for appointment on the post of Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) for the subject “Biology & Chemistry” under BC-II category.

¶23

Considering the said submission of learned counsel for the respondent-JSSC, there is no need to further proceeding in the matter.

¶24

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶25

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶26

Sanjay/

Kumari Neelam Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumari Neelam Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

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

Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited Thr Its Project in Charge Mr Arvind Kumar Vs M Nagaraju the Additional Secretary to the Government of India Ministry of Coal

Quazi Shakeel Ekta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Abdul Khalique Vs the State of Jharkhand

Praveen Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Sayuz Anzari Vs State of Jharkhand

Alakh Narayan Shukla Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Inspector General of Police