Allowed

Mamta Kumari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Sept 2026WPC/7221/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the JSSC advertisements for Post Graduate Trained Teachers for omitting BC-II category seats in Hindi. The court noted the issue was covered by a prior decision in W.P.(S) No. 2113 of 2023. The respondent JSSC conceded the point. The court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Principal Secretary, who must decide it in consultation with the JSSC Secretary within eight weeks, following the earlier order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file fresh representation before Respondent No. 2; Respondent No. 2, in consultation with Respondent No. 6, to decide within 8 weeks per W.P.(S) No. 2113/2023; consequential order within 4 weeks if favorable.

Mamta Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:27911

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(S). No. 7221 of 2026

¶4

¶5

Mamta Kumari, aged about 34 years, wife of Ajay Kumar, Daughter of Sri Sitaram Mahto, resident of At. Nura, Ward No. 3, Near Kalyan Kuwar Road, P.O. & P.S. Hazaribagh, Dist. Hazaribagh, Jharkhand.

¶6

………. Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Jharkhand

¶9

The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnnathpur, Dist. Ranchi.

¶10

The Principal Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnnathpur, Dist. Ranchi.

¶11

The Director, Secondary Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnnathpur, Dist. Ranchi.

¶12

The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi, having its office at Bargawan, P.O. & P.S. Namkom, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶13

The Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi, having its office at Bargawan, P.O. & P.S. Namkom, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand

¶14

The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi, having its office at Bargawan, P.O. & P.S. Namkom, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶15

………. Respondents .

¶16

----------

¶17

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶18

----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Oishi Das, AC to AG M/s. Sanjoy Piprawall, Prince Kumar, Jay Prakash, Advocates

¶19

¶20

02/ 15.09.2026 By way of present writ application, the petitioner prays for following

¶21

reliefs:

¶22

i. For showing cause upon the respondents, particularly respondent Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission as to how and under what authority /jurisdiction it has advertised fewer seats or no seats at all for the Backward Class-II category in Advertisement No. 02/2023 (Regular Vacancy) (Annexure 5) and Advertisement No. 03/2023 (Backlog Vacancy) (Annexure 10) for appointment on the post of Post Graduate Trained Teachers in various subjects including the subject of Hindi which is in direct contravention to Jharkhand Reservation Act, 2001 and the Jharkhand Reservation in Posts and Services Vacancies (For Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) (Amendment) Act, 2019 which, mandatorily prescribes 6% posts to be reserved for BC-II category in the process of appointment through direct recruitment.

¶23

¶24

2026:JHHC:27911

¶25

ii. For further direction upon the respondents to consider the claim petitioner for her appointment as post Graduate Trained Teacher, in Hindi subject treating her in B.C.-II Category in compliance of the order dated 22.04.2026 passed in W.P.(S) No. 2113/2023 and analogous cases as it was due to latches on part of the respondent authorities that the post of B.C. -II in Hindi subject were not shown in the advertisement and as such the petitioner could not apply in that Category.

¶26

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issue involved in this writ application is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.(S). No. 2113 of 2023 and analogous cases ; as such, similarly benefits be granted to this petitioner also.

¶27

3. Learned counsel for the respondent-JSSC very fairly admits that the issue involved in this writ application is covered by the above referred judgment. Accordingly, he submits that petitioner may approach the concerned respondents for redressal of her grievances.

¶28

4. Having regard to the fair submissions of the parties, the instant application stands disposed of by directing the petitioner to file fresh representation before the respondent No. 2 The moment the respondent No.2 will receive any such representation; he in consultation with respondent No. 6, shall take a decision in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations as well as the order passed in W.P.(S). No. 2113 of 2023 and analogous cases, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.

¶29

5. It goes without saying that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, necessary consequential order be issued within a further period of four weeks.

¶30

6. As a result, the instant writ application stands allowed.

¶31

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶32

15^th September, 2026 kunal/Uploaded 20.09.2026

¶33

Mamta Kumari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mamta Kumari v. the 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases