Bandna Bharti Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(S) No. 625 of 2021

1.Bandna Bharti, aged about 37 years, daughter of late Gulab Das, Permanent Resident of Mathbari, Bela Bagan, PO-Dabur Gram, PSDeoghar, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand)

¶4

Sushma Badaik, aged about 46 years, wife of Shri Meghu Baraik, Permanent Resident of Village-Banai Dega, PO-Obira Sunderpur, PSPalkot, District-Gumla (Jharkhand) ... … Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand.

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.

¶8

The Deputy Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.

¶9

The Under Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.

¶10

The Jharkhand Public Service Commission, through its secretary, Circular Road, P.O & P.S. -Lalpur, District- Ranchi.

¶11

The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Circular Road, P.O & P.S. -Lalpur, District- Ranchi.

¶12

Nirmal Soren, C/o- Department Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶13

8.Prabhakar Mirdha, C/o- Department Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶14

Chuteshwar Kumar Das, C/o- Department Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶15

Salini Khalkho, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶16

Md. Juhur Alam, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and

¶17

1

¶18

Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶19

12.Minakshi Bhagat, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶20

Mukesh Kumar Bauri, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶21

Priti Sinha, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶22

Rudra Pratap, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶23

16.Amit Kumar, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶24

Lekh Raj Nag, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶25

Nitu Kumari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶26

19.Kanchan Kumari Bhudolia, C/oDepartment of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶27

Sudhir Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶28

Pradeep Kumar Mahto, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶29

Monia Lata, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶30

Sanjay Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,

¶31

2

¶32

Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶33

Diwakar Prasad Chandrika Prasad Dwivedi, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶34

Vivek Kumar Mehta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶35

Santosh Gupta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶36

Aftab Ahmad, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶37

Aruna Kumari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶38

Ravindra Kumar Gupta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶39

Ashok Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶40

Bipin Kumar Dubey, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶41

Nitin Shivam Gupta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶42

Uday Razak, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶43

Kumar Abhishek Singh, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶44

Smt. Priyanka Singh, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project 3

¶45

Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶46

Rajiv Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶47

Deepmala, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶48

Smt. Parul Singh, C/o- Personnel Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶49

Premchand Kumar Sinha, C/oDepartment of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 40. Arun Oraon, C/o- Personnel Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶50

Kanchan Singh, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶51

Nagendra Tiwari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶52

Praveen Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶53

Gunjan Kumari Sinha, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶54

Md. Mozahid Ansari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶55

Rupesh Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶56

47.Alok Waran Keshari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶57

4

¶58

Rajendra Prasad Gupta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶59

Anuj Bando, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶60

Ram Ratan Kumar Barnawal, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶61

Rakesh Kumar Gope, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶62

Arun Kumar Munda, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶63

Amitabh Bhagat, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶64

Dinesh Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶65

Akhilesh Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶66

Khakha Shushil Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶67

Chandan Prasad, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶68

Kuldeep Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶69

Shasi Kant Siknkar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶70

Sameer Reniar Khalkho, C/oDepartment of Personnel, 5

¶71

Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶72

Yesmita Singh, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶73

Malay Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶74

Ashok Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶75

Santosh Kumar Prajapati, C/oDepartment of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶76

Md. Anish, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶77

Vedwanti Kumari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶78

Umesh Kumar Swansi, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶79

Sunil Verma, C/o-Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶80

Dipti Priyanka Kujur, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶81

Sashi Bushan Verma, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶82

Sanju Kumari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶83

Jaya Sankhi Murmu, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project

¶84

6

¶85

Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶86

Maruti Minj, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶87

Amren Dang, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶88

Sandeep Bhagat, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶89

Shankaracharaya Samad, C/oDepartment of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶90

Vijay Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi,

¶91

Satendar Mahto, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶92

Umesh Mandal, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶93

Amit Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶94

Md. Quayum Ansari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶95

Savita Topno, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶96

Naziya Afroz, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶97

Pritilata Kisku, C/o- Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶98

7

¶99

Sunil Kumar Prajapati, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶100

Ram Narayan Khalkho, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶101

Sima Dipika Toppo, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶102

Sumant Tirki, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶103

Sachidanand Mahto, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶104

Naresh Razak, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶105

Manoranjan Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶106

Gautam Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶107

Kamini Kausahl Lakra, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶108

Pritilata Murmu, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶109

Amrita Khakah, C/o Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶110

Pankaj Kumar Ravi, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.Ο. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶111

Bimal Soren, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and

¶112

8

¶113

Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶114

98.Ravindra Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶115

Vinay Prakash Tigga, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶116

Md. Zulfikar Ansari, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶117

Ravi Kishore Ram, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶118

Anita Karketa, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶119

Johan Tudu, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶120

Sarwan Ram, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa

¶121

Rajesh Dungdug, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶122

Gyan mani Ekka, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶123

Anil Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶124

Anil Kumar, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶125

Smt. Kiran Bodra, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,

¶126

9

¶127

Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶128

Siman Marandi, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶129

Smt. Sashi Nilima Dungdung, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi

¶130

Vivek Kumar Suman, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶131

Rajesh Ekka, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶132

Reshma Dungdug, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶133

Jaypal Soye, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶134

Kirshna Murari Tirki, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶135

Sameer Alfred Murmu, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶136

Sukeshni Kerketta, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶137

Nisha Tirkey, C/o- Department of Personnel, Administrative and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. … ... Respondents

¶138

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶139

For the Petitioners : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Anurag Kumar, Advocate Mr. Aman Dayal Singh, Advocate For the Pvt. Respondents : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate

¶140

10

¶141

Mr. Chanchal Jain, Advocate [For Resp. Nos.19, 20, 23, 26, 29, 38, 45, 47, 55, 60, 61, 64, 65, 76, 82, 88, 89, 92, 93, 96, 99, 102, 111, 114, 115 & 118] Mr. A. Allam, Sr. Advocate Miss Sushmita Kumar, Advocate Miss Asjia Sultana, Advocate [For Resp. Nos. 8, 11 & 13] For the Respondent-JPSC : Mr. Abhay Prakash, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Mrs. Pinky Tiwary, AC to AG --------

¶142

JUDGMENT

¶143

CAV on 25/07/2024 Pronounced on 04/10/2024

¶144

The instant writ application has been preferred by the

¶145

petitioners praying for the following reliefs:

¶146

“I. For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s), particularly a writ in nature mandamus commanding upon Respondent No. 5 (Respondent-JPSC) to issue appropriate orders improving the date of recommendation of appointments of the Petitioners, i.e. on the date when the similarly situated candidates of 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination, conducted by JPSC, were recommended for appointment (change from the date 30.04.2013 to the date 02.08.2010); and further pass directions upon Respondent State to improve the date of appoints of the Petitioners i.e., w.e.f. from the date when the similarly situated candidates of 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination were appointed/offered appointment (change from the date 08.06.2013 to the date 11.08.2010).

¶147

II. For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s), particularly a writ in nature of certiorari for quashing of notification no 5835, dated 13.11.2020, issued under the signature of Respondent no. 2, as contained in Annexure- 13, whereby and where under the seniority of the petitioners have been wrongly fixed, and they have been placed below the candidates, i.e. respondent no. 7 to 119, these Private Respondents have been recommended

¶148

appointment by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission on the post of Deputy Collector in 4^th Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of the Adv. No. 07/2010, whereas the petitioners were recommended for appointment by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission on the post of Deputy Collector in 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of Adv. No. 11/2007.

¶149

III. For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s), particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents No. 1 to 4 to prepare fresh/revised seniority list by rectifying the mistakes/discrepancies in seniority list as contained in notification no. 5835, dated 13.11.2020, issued by the Respondent No. 2, directing to placing the Petitioner No. 1 at serial no. 295 i.e. just above the Respondent No. 7, Nirmal Soren and Petitioner No. 2 at serial no. 296 i.e. just above respondent no 8, Prabhkar Mirdha, meaning thereby, over and above the candidates of 4 combined JPSC; and further rearrange Petitioners' seniority on the basis of their merit position amongst the members of 3^rd JPSC, in accordance with the results of 3^rd JPSC examinations.”

¶150

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an Advertisement No. 11/2007 was issued by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (in short, JPSC) for the 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination for appointment to the post of Deputy Collector and Deputy

¶151

Superintendent of Police and on other posts. The recommendation of selected and successful candidates was made on 02.08.2010 and appointment notification was published on 11.08.2010. This contained list of candidates granted appointment by the State and the names of the petitioners were not there in the recommended list or the appointed list. 3. At this juncture itself it is necessary to indicate that on the one hand, the JPSC issued another Advertisement No. 07 of 2010 by which the selection process of 4^th Combined Civil Services Examination has been started; and on the other hand, the petitioner no. 1 on perusal of answer sheet of Geography Paper-1 found that 24 marks as awarded by the examiner were not added in her total marks of Geography Paper-1; whereas the petitioner no. 2 on perusal of her answer sheet of Anthropology Paper-1 found that 7 marks were not added in total marks of Anthropology Paper-1. Accordingly, the petitioners moved before this Court.

¶152

Vide order dated 03.10.2012 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3532/2012, this Court directed the JPSC to issue fresh marks-sheet in favour of the petitioner no. 2. The corrected marks-sheet was issued in favour of petitioner no. 2 showing therein total marks of the petitioner no. 2 as 781.8 marks in ST category which was much higher than the last selected and recommended candidate in ST category. The petitioner no. 1 was also issued corrected marks-sheet by showing therein that she has secured 784 marks in SC category which was above the last selected and recommended candidate in SC category.

¶153

4. However, even after issuance of corrected marks-sheet, the JPSC did not consider the representations of the petitioners and therefore they preferred W.P.(S) Nos. 3672/2012 and 7598/2012 which were heard and disposed of by this Court in terms of orders dated 03.01.2013 and 16.11.2013 respectively directing the JPSC to pass appropriate order in accordance with law observing inter alia that it prima facie appears to be a serious case of latches and discrimination.

¶154

12

¶155

Pursuant thereto; the JPSC vide Letter No. 1190 dated 30.04.2013 recommended the name of the petitioners before the respondent no. 2 for their appointment to the post of Deputy Collector in 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of Advertisement No. 11 of 2007. The Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbshasa, Government of Jharkhand vide Notification Nos. 4918 and 4919 dated 08.06.2013 appointed these petitioners on the post of Deputy Collector with a rider that their seniority will be decided as per the seniority list of the JPSC.

¶156

5. Subsequently, the Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand vide order as contained in Memo No. 2282 dated 11.05.2020 issued the provisional seniority list and further directed to submit the objections, if any, for determination of seniority. The petitioners submitted their objection before the respondent no. 2 on 22.05.2020 and 19.05.2020 respectively, stating therein that fixation of their seniority at serial nos. 407 and 408, after candidates who have been recommended for appointment in 4^th Combined Civil Services Examination is illegal in view of the circulars dated 12.12.1934, 15.07.1944, etc. and in view of the fact that they have been recommended by the JPSC for appointment on the post of Deputy Collector in 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of Advertisement No. 11/2007 and as such in view of the Rules and Regulations of the State Government their seniority has to be fixed along with candidates who have been recommended for appointment in 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination and on the basis of marks secured by the petitioners.

¶157

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioner no. 1 belongs to SC category and has secured 784 marks and the petitioner no. 2 belongs to ST category and has secured 781.8 marks and as such petitioner no. 1 is entitled to be placed in the seniority list above Nirmal Soren, i.e. serial no. 295 and petitioner no.2 is entitled to be placed above Prabhakar Mirda i.e. serial no. 296 of the seniority list; however, the

¶158

13

¶159

respondent no. 2 without considering the objections as submitted by the petitioners, published the final seniority list vide Notification No. 5835 dated 13.11.2020 in which petitioners have again been placed and shown at serial nos. 407 and 408 respectively.

¶160

He further contended that in terms of the circulars of the State Government dated 13.07.1971 and 26.08.1972 and other circulars of the united State of Bihar which are applicable in the State of Jharkhand in terms of Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 the seniority of all the selected and recommended candidates have to be fixed on the basis of marks secured by the candidates in 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of Advertisement No. 11 of 2007.

¶161

He further submits that under similar circumstance the case of one Dr. Madhu Mishra was considered by this Court in W.P.(S) 2371 of 2014 and directions were passed on 10.08.2017, 31.08.2017 and 20.09.2017 deciding the case of the said Dr. Madhu Mishra. Pursuant to the directions of this Court, the JPSC improved the date of recommendation of appointment by publishing appropriate corrigendum and further the Ranchi University improved the date of appointment and subsequent seniority position vide orders dated 03.11.2017 and 17.11.2017 respectively.

¶162

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners lastly submits that it is crystal clear that the petitioners were not at fault for giving their joining on 30.04.2013 instead they were fully entitled for appointment/joining on 02.08.2010, inasmuch as, it was due to the latches on the part of Commission that the petitioners were forced to knock the door of this Court for their appointment and it was only due to intervention of this Court that the petitioners were recommended for appointment by the JPSC. Accordingly, the date of recommendation of these petitioners may be shifted from 30.04.2013 to 02.08.2010 and in pursuance to the shift in the date of recommendation the date of appointment of these petitioners may be shifted from 08.06.2013 to 11.08.2010 i.e. from the date when similarly

¶163

14

¶164

situated other candidates of the 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination have been inducted into service and thereafter all consequential benefits may be extended to them.

¶165

8. Learned counsels for the JPSC and State-respondents submit that since the names of the petitioners were not included, they preferred writ petitions being W.P.(C) No. 3532/2012 for issuing fresh mark-sheets after re-totaling the marks of the petitioners and W.P.(C) No. 3672/2012 for directing the respondent-JPSC to recommend the names of the petitioners for appointment in terms of 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination, 2008. The aforesaid writ petitions were allowed vide orders dated 03.10.2012 and 03.01.2013 and accordingly after re-totaling the marks of the petitioners it was found that the total marks of the petitioners were more than that of the last selected candidates in their respective category.

¶166

However, since all the vacancies were filled under 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination, 2008, the respondent-JPSC vide its letters dated 24.09.2012 and 08.03.2013 requested the respondentDepartment to provide vacancy for 02 posts (01 post in the Scheduled Caste and 01 post in Scheduled Tribe category), so that the recommendation of the petitioners could be sent for appointment on the post of Deputy Collector.

¶167

9. Consequently, the respondent-Department vide No. 3031 dated 05.04.2013 provided the requisition for 02 posts to the respondent-JPSC and accordingly recommendations were sent for appointment of the petitioners. Learned counsel further submits that while appointing the petitioners, the last selected SC/ST candidate of the 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination, 2008 had not been dismissed or discharged from their service and hence the petitioners have not been appointed against the vacancies of the 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examinations, 2008; rather they have been appointed against fresh vacancies that were created specifically for their appointment. 10. Learned counsel for the private-respondents submits that

¶168

15

¶169

seniority is reckoned from the date when an employee is born in the cadre (date of joining). The principle of reckoning seniority on the basis of date of joining i.e. the date on which an incumbent is born in the cadre is widely accepted and legal in the eyes of law. He further submits that two candidates from 4^th Batch have been placed at serial nos. 620 and 621 in the seniority list as per their date of joining while their batch-mates have been placed much above them as per their date of joining. Further, the abovementioned statements are substantiated by the fact that the officer at serial nos. 303 and 304 belonging to 3^rd Batch have joined in the year 2011 and accordingly they have been placed below all other candidates of their batch who have joined in the year 2010 and hence in the instant case placing the petitioners below the answering respondents is neither illegal nor unjust and therefore the instant writ petition is fit to be dismissed.

¶170

It has been further submitted that the petitioners have been given conditional appointment as in the appointment letter issued to the petitioners, it had been made clear and in specific stipulation that their seniority will be decided on the basis of the recommendation of the JPSC. 11. It has been contended that the aforesaid appointment letters were neither challenged by the petitioners before this Court nor any objections were raised at the relevant time; meaning thereby, the petitioners knowing fully well that their seniority will be decided on the basis of the recommendation of the JPSC joined on the post of Deputy Collector and therefore they cannot now claim for seniority particularly when the appointment letter has attained finality and also considering the fact that the impugned seniority list has been issued after necessary consultation of the respondent-JPSC.

¶171

12. In crux the respondents made following submissions:

¶172

(i) Date of appointment cannot be shifted to interior date when there was no vacancy.

¶173

(ii) Seniority is reckoned from a date when a candidate is born in the cadre.

¶174

16

¶175

(iii) Seniority once settled cannot be unsettled.

¶176

(iv) The petitioners’ case should also be dismissed on the ground of delay and latches.

¶177

In order to buttress their argument the respondents have relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “Roma Sonkar v. M.P. State Public Service Commission & Anr.” reported in (2018) 17 SCC 106 , where in paragraph no.5 it has been stated as under:

¶178

“5. In the above circumstances, we are of the view that it is only in the interest of justice and for doing complete justice between the parties that the appellant is appointed in one of the available posts of Commercial Tax Inspector, without treating this as a precedent. Ordered accordingly. In order to avoid any future dispute with regard to seniority, we make it clear that the appellant shall be entitled to seniority only with effect from 1-8-2018. The appointment shall be effected within four weeks from today. We also make it clear that in case the appointment order is not issued to the appellant within four weeks from today, for all purposes the appellant shall be deemed to have been appointed with effect from 1-9-2018 .”

¶179

13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through documents available on record it appears that pursuant to the Advertisement No. 11 of 2007 i.e. 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination for appointment on the post of Deputy Collector and Deputy Superintendent of Police and other post, the JPSC recommended the name of successful candidates on 02.08.2010 and pursuant thereto their appointment notification was published on 11.08.2010 in which the name of these petitioners did not find any place and pursuant thereto, JPSC also issued another Advertisement No. 07 of 2010 and process of 4^th Combined Civil Services Examination started.

¶180

14. It further transpires that the petitioner no.1 after seeing the result of 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination, 2008 came to know that in Geography Paper No.1 she was awarded 24 marks by the examiner but the same was not added in the total marks. Likewise, petitioner no.2 found that 7 marks were not added in the total marks of Anthropology Paper-1. Accordingly, one of the petitioners knocked the door of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3532 of 2012 and this Court directed the JPSC to issue fresh mark-sheet in favour of the petitioner no.2. Pursuant to the order passed by

¶181

17

¶182

this Court corrected mark-sheet was issued in favour of petitioner no.2 showing total marks as 781.8 marks in ST Category which was much higher than the last selected and recommended candidate.

¶183

Likewise, petitioner no.1 was also issued corrected marksheet and she secured 784 in SC category which was above last selected/recommended candidate. Again, after the intervention of this Court in W.P.(S) No. 3672 of 2012 and W.P.(S) No. 7598 of 2012 this Court vide orders dated 03.01.2013 and 16.11.2013 respectively, directed the JPSC to pass appropriate order with an observation that it was a serious case of latches.

¶184

Subsequently, on 30.04.2013 the JPSC recommended the names of the petitioners before the respondent no.2 for their appointment on the post of Deputy Collector in 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination in terms of Advertisement No.11 of 2007 and accordingly the Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Government of Jharkhand vide Notification Nos. 4918 and 4919, both dated 08.06.2013, appointed these petitioners on the post of Deputy Collector with a rider that their seniority will be decided as per the seniority list of the JPSC.

¶185

15. It further appears from record that provisional seniority list of JPSC was published on 11.05.2020 wherein these petitioners filed objection stating therein that fixation of their seniority at serial nos. 407 and 408 which are fixed after candidates who have been recommended for appointment in 4^th Combined Civil Services Examination is illegal; and finally, these petitioners approached this Court for the aforesaid rectification and correction in the seniority list, inasmuch as, they prayed that their recommendation may be shifted from 30.04.2013 to 02.08.2010. 16. Having regard to the aforesaid factual scenario this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners were never at fault for giving their joining on 04.07.2013; rather both of them were fully entitled for appointment/joining on 11.08.2010 itself and it was due to the latches on

¶186

18

¶187

the part of JPSC that the petitioners were forced to knock the door of this Court for their appointment and it is only after the intervention of this Court they were recommended for appointment by JPSC for which the petitioners were never responsible.

¶188

It further transpires from record that the JPSC has accepted their fault and recommended their names for appointment for the 3^rd JPSC Combined Examination; as such this Court holds that the petitioners are fully entitled to the extent that the recommendation may be shifted from 30.04.2013 to 02.08.2010 and in pursuance to the shift in the date of recommendation, the date of appointment of these petitioners may be shifted from 08.06.2013 to 11.08.2010. The opinion of this Court is fortified by following judgment:

¶189

In “C. Jayachandran v. State of Kerala & Ors.” reported in (2020) 5 SCC 230 , the Hon’ble Apex Court has held at paragraph nos. 36 to 39 as under:

¶190

“36. In Sanjay Dhar [Sanjay Dhar v. J&K Public Service Commission, (2000) 8 SCC 182 : 2000 SCC (L&S) 1090] , a three-Judge Bench of this Court held as under : (SCC p. 191, para 16)

¶191

“16. For the foregoing reasons the appeal is allowed. The judgment under appeal is set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be deemed to have been appointed along with other appointees under the appointment order dated 6-31995 and assigned a place of seniority consistently with his placement in the order of merit in the select list prepared by J&K PSC and later forwarded to the Law Department.”

¶192

37. In Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli [Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli v. State of A.P., (2014) 13 SCC 393 : (2015) 1 SCC (L&S) 407] , this Court held as under : (SCC p. 397, para 13)

¶193

“13. For the reasons recorded in Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli v. State of A.P. [Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli v. State of A.P., (2014) 13 SCC 393, paras 1-10 : (2015) 1 SCC (L&S) 407] , the present appeals are allowed and it is directed that the High Court as well as the respondent State will do the needful for giving appointment to the appellant with retrospective effect i.e. from the date on which she ought to have been appointed, however, she shall not be paid salary for the period during which she has not worked as a District and Sessions Judge. We are sure that the respondents will do the needful for the appointment of the appellant at an early date.”

¶194

38. In view of the above, the appellant having been participated in the same selection process and in view of the direction of the Division Bench of the High Court, was rightly placed by the High Court by giving him revised select list placing him at Sl. No. 41 by pushing Badharudeen from general category candidate to OBC category candidate at Sl. No. 42.

¶195

39. The appellant was wrongfully excluded from the process of appointment on account of an illegal and arbitrary grant of moderation of marks. The Government in its Order dated 22-12-2010 cancelled the appointment of three District and Sessions Judges who were granted benefit of moderation. Badharudeen was earlier assigned general category seat but since the appellant was higher in merit, Badharudeen was pushed down and adjusted against OBC

¶196

19

¶197

category seat at Sl. No. 42. Badharudeen has not challenged his pushing down at Sl. No. 42 either before the learned Single Bench of the High Court or before the Division Bench of the High Court or even before this Court. Therefore, as respondent, he cannot be permitted to dispute the grant of seniority to the appellant at Sl. No. 41. The judgment referred to by the learned counsel is not helpful to the arguments raised as the appellant therein sought seniority as direct recruit from the time when the vacancies occurred. To raise such an argument, reliance was placed upon judgment of this Court reported in Union of India v. N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] , wherein this Court held that a person is disentitled to claim seniority from the date he was not borne in the service. The said finding is in the context of the claim of the appellant to claim seniority from the date of availability of the vacancies; whereas in the present case, the appellant is claiming seniority from the date the other candidates in the same selection process were appointed but the appellant is excluded on account of an illegal act of the High Court of the moderation of marks. Therefore, the said judgment is not of any help to the arguments raised.”

¶198

17. At this stage it is also profitable to refer the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Sanjay Dhar v. J & K Public Service Commission & Anr.” reported in (2000) 8 SCC 182 wherein it has been held at paragraph nos. 10, 14 and 16 as under:

¶199

“10. The main question arising for decision is: whether the certificate of practice furnished by the appellant satisfied the requirement of Rule 9 and, if so, whether the appellant was wrongfully denied the appointment in 1992-93 selections.

¶200

14. Rule 9 of the J&K Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules, 1967 must receive a purposive interpretation. Purposive interpretation enables ascertaining the purpose of enactment, the object sought to be achieved and the mischief sought to be taken care of or prevented. The object of the Rule is to exclude lawyers not in actual practice, and hence inexperienced, from entering judicial service. At the same time the Rule cannot be so construed as to create an anomalous situation by asking District Judge to certify period of practice of a lawyer practising in High Court and not in District Courts, “based on his personal knowledge or official records of District Courts”— as J&K PSC wanted the appellant to do. A literal compliance, if insisted on, may defeat the object sought to be achieved by the Rule itself. If an advocate is practising exclusively in the High Court, the District Judge would not have any material available in his records to verify the factum and the period of actual practice of any applicant. The Registrar of the High Court would be the best-suited person to issue a certificate in that regard and since the Rule contemplates the requisite certificate being issued by the District Judge, the underlying object sought to be achieved by the Rule would be fulfilled if the certificate issued by the Registrar is countersigned by the District Judge or the District Judge issues a certificate of his own based on the certificate issued by the Registrar. In this view of the matter the certificate dated 12-12-1992/17-3-1993 filed by the appellant before the J&K PSC satisfied the requirement of Rule 9 abovesaid and the J&K PSC was not justified in rejecting the application of the appellant holding him to be ineligible. As the appellant participated in the process of selection protected by the interim orders of the High Court and was also successful having secured third position in the select list, he could not have been denied appointment. The appellant is, therefore, fully entitled to the relief of his appointment being calculated w.e.f. the same date from which the candidates finding their place in the order of appointments issued pursuant to the select list prepared by the J&K PSC for 1992-93 were appointed and deserves to be assigned notionally a place in seniority consistently with the order of merit assigned by the J&K PSC.

¶201

16. For the foregoing reasons the appeal is allowed. The judgment under appeal is set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be deemed to have been appointed along with other appointees under the appointment order dated 6-31995 and assigned a place of seniority consistently with his placement in the

¶202

20

¶203

order of merit in the select list prepared by J&K PSC and later forwarded to the Law Department. During the course of hearing the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant made a statement at the Bar that the appellant was interested only in having his seniority reckoned notionally in terms of this order and was not claiming any monetary benefit by way of emoluments for the period for which he would have served in case he would have been appointed by order dated 6-31995. We record that statement and direct that the appellant shall be entitled only to the benefit of notional seniority (and not monetary benefits) being given to him by implementing this order. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. The contesting respondents shall pay the appellant costs quantified at Rs 5000.”

¶204

As a matter of fact, in the aforesaid case the Hon’ble Apex Court has categorically held in para 16 that the appellant shall be deemed to have been appointed along with other appointees under the original appointment order and assigned the case of seniority consistently with their placement in the order of merit in the select list prepared by the Department. In yet another case in “Lakshman Rao Yadavalli & Anr. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.” reported in (2014) 13 SCC 393 wherein at paragraph no.10, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the respondentState should give appointment to the appellants to the post in question with effect from the date on which they ought to have been appointed.

¶205

Similar views have been reiterated in “Sasidhar Reddy Sura v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.” reported in (2014) 2 SCC 158 (refer, paragraph nos. 18 and 23), “Balwant Singh Narwal & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.” reported in (2008) 7 SCC 728 (refer, paragraph nos. 8 to 10).

¶206

Further, in the case of “Pilla Sitaram Patrudu & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.” reported in (1996) 8 SCC 637 , the Hon’ble Apex Court has categorically held that the appointment of such type of petitioner was delayed due to latches on the part of the Department (refer, paragraph nos. 2 and 3).

¶207

18. The judgment relied upon by the respondents is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case, inasmuch as, the petitioners were never at fault for giving their joining on 04.07.2013; rather it was due to the latches on the part of JPSC and that the JPSC has accepted their fault and recommended their names for appointment for the 3^rd JPSC

¶208

21

¶209

Combined Examination.

¶210

19. Having regard to the aforesaid discussion and the judicial pronouncements, the instant writ application, deserves to be, and is hereby, allowed. Accordingly, this Court issues following directions:

¶211

(i) The recommendation by JPSC be shifted from 30.04.2013 to 02.08.2010 and in pursuance to the shift in the date of recommendation; the date of appointment of these petitioners be shifted from 08.06.2013 to 11.08.2010.

¶212

(ii) Respondent nos. 1 to 4 are directed to prepare the fresh/revised seniority list on the basis of the merit position of the petitioners amongst the members of 3^rd Combined Civil Services Examination.

¶213

20. As a result, the instant writ application stands allowed and disposed of in the manner indicated hereinabove. Pending I.As., if any, stands closed.

¶214

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶215

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated: 04 /10/2024 Amit

¶216

AFR/

¶217

22

Bandna Bharti v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bandna Bharti 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Virendra Pratap Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Praveen Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Lok Prerna (a Registered Non Governmental Organization) Represented by Secretary Madhav Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Poonam Lakra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Baldeo Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vivek Kachhap Vs the State of Jharkhand