Disposed¶judgment para 9 (structural ¶25)

Meena Kumari @ Mina Kumari v. Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through Its Secretary

Jharkhand HC2 Feb 2026WPC/520/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Graduate Trained Teacher; Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission (JSSC); Advertisement No.21/2016; Clause 4(घ); 25% reserved quota; five years' Government School teaching experience; mandatory qualification; experience certificate Annexure-1; non-Government school; candidature rejected; consideration against 75% vacancies; appropriate order within 08 weeks; mandamus denied; writ petition disposed; interlocutory application disposed; Ananda Sen, J.; Ranchi; 02.02.2026; W.P.(S) No. 520 of 2026.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus for the 25% reserved quota denied; petitioner's case to be considered against the remaining 75% vacancies if she qualifies, with an appropriate order within 08 weeks of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶judgment para 9 (structural ¶25)

Meena Kumari @ Mina Kumari Vs Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through Its Secretary — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶judgment para 9 (structural ¶25)

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner met the mandatory Clause 4(घ) requirement of five years' teaching experience in a Government School, entitling her to consideration against the 25% reserved posts under Advertisement No.21/2016. +1 more

¶judgment para 6 (structural ¶22)

Court's answer

Because the petitioner was not working in a Government School and did not possess the requisite Government School teaching experience, which was a mandatory condition for the benefit of the 25% reservation, no illegality was committed by the respondents in ignoring her candidature in the 25% quota.

¶judgment para 7 (structural ¶23)

Ratio / Principle

The respondents correctly treated the petitioner against the rest 75% of total vacancy; consequently no relief can be granted for consideration against the 25% reserved quota.

¶judgment para 7 (structural ¶23)

Key takeaways

If the petitioner qualifies against the rest of the 75% vacancies, her case will be considered and an appropriate order passed within 08 weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶judgment para 8 (structural ¶24)

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Single-judge bench (Ananda Sen, J., High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, 02.02.2026) disposed of W.P.(S) No. 520 of 2026, in which the petitioner sought a mandamus to be considered for appointment as Graduate Trained Teacher pursuant to Advertisement No.21/2016. The impugned order had excluded her candidature from the 25% posts reserved under Clause 4(घ) for teachers with five years' service in a Government School. As her Annexure-1 experience certificate was from a school admittedly not a Government School (a concession made by her own counsel), the court held that five years' Government School teaching experience was a mandatory condition for the 25% reservation, that no illegality was committed in ignoring her candidature in that quota, and that the respondents had correctly treated her against the remaining 75% of vacancies. The court directed that if she qualifies against the 75% vacancies her case be considered and an appropriate order passed within 08 weeks of receipt of a copy of the judgment; pending interlocutory applications were likewise disposed of.

¶1

2026:JHHC:2605

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 520 of 2026

¶3

------

¶4

Meena Kumari @ Mina Kumari, aged about 42 years, wife of Sri Ramratan Singh Choudhary, resident of Village & PO-Jhalbarda, PS:Chandankiyari, District-Bokaro. … … Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Kali Nagar, Chaibagan, Namkom, PO & PS: Namkom, District-Ranchi through its Secretary.

¶7

Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Kali Nagar, Chaibagan, Namkom, PO & PS: Namkom, District-Ranchi.

¶8

Controller of Examination, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Kali Nagar, Chaibagan, Namkom, PO & PS: Namkom, District-Ranchi. … … Respondent(s)

¶9

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶10

------

¶11

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate Mr. Vikesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate

¶12

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate

¶13

02/ 2^nd February, 2026

¶14

1. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

2. The petitioner by this writ petition has prayed for a Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Graduate Trained Teacher pursuant to Advertisement No.21/2016.

¶16

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has necessary qualification but in spite of furnishing the experience certificate, the case of the petitioner was not considered and an order was passed that the candidature of the petitioner cannot be considered, as she does not qualify for the said post.

¶17

4. After hearing the parties, I have gone through the impugned order.

¶18

5. So far as the impugned order is concerned, I find that it has been mentioned that since the petitioner does not possess the requisite qualification as mentioned in 4(घ), her candidature will not be considered against the 25% post which has been kept

2026:JHHC:2605

reserved.

6. The Clause 4(घ) provides that 25% posts were kept reserved for the teachers who worked in the Government School for a period of five years. The petitioner is relying upon Annexure-1 which is the experience certificate. The said school is admittedly not a Government School as accepted by the learned counsel for the petitioner also.

¶23

7. Since the petitioner was not working in a Government School and did not possess the requisite experience of teaching in Government School which was a mandatory condition to take the benefit of 25% reservation, I find that no illegality has been committed by the respondents in ignoring the case of the petitioner in the 25% quota. The respondents have correctly treated the petitioner against the rest 75% of total vacancy. Thus, no relief can be granted to the petitioner, which the petitioner is seeking to consider her against the 25% reserved quota.

¶24

8. If the petitioner qualifies against the rest of 75% vacancies, her case will be considered and an appropriate order will be passed within a period of 08 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶25

9. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of .

¶26

10. Pending interlocutory application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶27

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶28

02.02.2026 S.K.D., cp2

¶29

Uploaded on 06.02.2026

¶30