AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Ms. Aanya, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ravi Kerketta, learned counsel for the respondent-State and Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, learned
counsel for respondents-JSSC.
This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due
to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been
heard.
The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for direction upon the respondents to complete the process of appointment for the post of Lower
Division Clerk (Collecteriat) and Panchyat Secretary, Lower Division Clerk (Treasury Clerk, Commercial Tax Department, Food Public Distribution)
Stenographer-State Cadre, Class-III post.
Ms. Aanya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that pursuant to Advertisement No.01 of 2017 (Regular) and Advertisement No. 2
of 2017 (Backlog), all the petitioners filled up their application form and admit cards were issued after that the petitioners appeared in both the
examination i.e preliminary and mains examination and after successfully qualifying both the examinations, the petitioners were called for
counselling/document verification vide notification dated 20.08.2019 published in the website of Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission issued under
the signature of respondent no.2 in which the roll number of the petitioners is also appearing in different districts of the State of Jharkhand.
The petitioners had appeared in document verification procedure/counselling on different dates in the light of aforesaid notification and during the said
counselling, the petitioners had submitted all the relevant documents including educational qualification and as per the demand of JSSC, the
respondent-JSSC had successfully accepted the relevant documents without any objection from any corner.
Ms. Aanya, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that now the matter can be disposed of in the light of the judgment passed by three Judges
Bench of this Court in the case of Soni Kumari & Others Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others passed in W.P.(C) No.1387 of 2017 vide order
dated 21.09.2020 particularly Para 66 which is quoted hereinbelow:-
66.      We also propose to make it abundantly clear that by the ad interim order dated 18.9.2019 passed by this Court in these writ
applications, the selection process was never stayed by the Court in the non-scheduled districts, though, as informed to us, it had erroneously been
taken by the State Government like that. There was no stay for appointments on any post in the non-scheduled districts, or for that matter there was
no stay for the appointments even in the scheduled districts, rather, only the operation of the Notification No. 5938 dated 14.7.2016 was stayed by this
Court. In other words, the appointments could be continued to be made even in the scheduled districts, ignoring the aforesaid notification.
Ms. Aanya, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are belonging from non-scheduled districts and there is no stay operation
and in view of the observation made in Paragraph 66 of the Full Bench judgment, the writ petition can be disposed of considering the case of the
petitioners.
Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, learned counsel appearing for respondents-Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission submits that the writ petition can be disposed
of only to the effect that JSSC will examine as to whether the petitioners are coming under the zone of consideration or not and if they are under the
zone of consideration, appropriate order will be passed.
In view of above facts and considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of with direction to the
petitioners to file fresh representation before the respondent no.2 within a period of three weeks from today. If such representation is filed before
respondent no.2, he will take a decision in accordance with observation made in Full Bench judgment in the case of Soni Kumari (supra) and he will
examine as to whether the petitioners are coming within the zone of consideration or not. The respondent no.2 will pass appropriate reasoned order
within a period of eight weeks thereafter.
With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.