Shrawan Kumar Jha & Ors vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors

Heard Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mrs. Vandana Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-State, Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the Intervener and Mr. Ravi Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 5 & 14.

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.

I.A. No. 4431 of 2020 has been filed for impleading the interveners as party respondent.

On 15.09.2020 learned counsel for the petitioners restricted his prayer to prayer nos. 3 & 4. Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the interveners submitted that the matter may come tomorrow to enable him to take instruction on the point that as to whether the interveners in spite of that are willing to contest this writ petition or not, that is why the matter has been taken up today again.

Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the interveners at the outset submits that he has instruction that interveners needs to contest this writ petition.

Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the interveners took the Court to three notifications which have been annexed with the writ petition and submits that promotion avenues are created therein by way of 50% direct recruitment in the post of Circle Inspector from lower post, 25 % to be filled up from the persons who have completed 10 years of service by way of limited examination and 25% are to be filled up from preference accessibility of service. He submits that either the petitioners or the interveners are not fulfilling the minimum qualification criteria for promotion i.e. period of 8 years. He submits that in that view of the matter interveners are necessary party in the writ petition. He further submits that interveners are covered with resolution dated 24.10.2014. He submits that in view of the prayer no. 1 which has been left out by the learned counsel for the petitioners, petitioners are not entitled to be considered for promotion.

Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the interveners are junior to the petitioners. He draws the attention of the Court to seniority list which is at page 50 of the writ petition which is final seniority list prepared after inviting objection by the affected parties. In the seniority list, last petitioner is at serial no. 90 whereas the interveners in the seniority list are at serial no. 125, 129, 130, 137, 161 and 167. He submits that admittedly in the seniority list interveners are junior to the petitioners. He submits that State is arbitrarily invoking notification on which the interveners are relying and that notification which is apparent from the earlier promotion order which has been challenged in this writ petition whereby the persons junior to the petitioners have been promoted w.e.f. 13.12.2019.

There is no doubt that State can exercise power to relax the rules but this power cannot be exercised capriciously or arbitrarily to give undue advantage to individual employee. Prima facie, it appears that junior to the petitioners have been promoted by promotion order dated 13.12.2019. Petitioners admittedly are senior to the persons who have already been promoted and the interveners who have come forward for intervening in the writ petition whereas petitioners fulfil the prescribed standard of promotion or not that will be considered at the final hearing of the writ petition.

In view of the point raised in the writ petition the entire notifications/rules which are subject matter of the writ petition are needs to be considered and in that view of the matter the Court comes to the conclusion that the private respondents and interveners need to be heard before taking any decision in the writ petition.

Accordingly, I.A. No. 4431 of 2020 stands allowed.

The learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to array the interveners as party respondents in the writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to serve a copy of the writ petition to the learned counsel for the interveners.

The interveners are at liberty to file response within a period of two weeks.

Mr. Ravi Kumar Singh, learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent nos. 5 & 14.

Let notice be issued upon the respondent nos. 6 to 26 except respondent no. 14 under registered cover with A/D as well as by ordinary process for which requisites etc must be filed within two weeks.

Seeing the nature of the issue involved in this writ petition, the Court found it proper to hear the interveners as well as private respondents who have been promoted on 13.12.2019, which is one of the subject matter of the writ petition.

The contesting interveners have right of selection or promotion to any post, is one of the subject matter of this writ petition, as now they have been impleaded party respondents in the writ petition.

To avoid multiplicity of the writ petition, it is need of the hour that further D.P.C be held after final decision of the writ petition. The Court is inclined to decide this matter at the earliest after completion of pleadings in the writ petition. The matter of relaxation are one of the subject matter to decide and if any D.P.C. during the pendency of the writ petition may take place, the writ petition may become infructuous.

In that view of the matter the State is directed not to convey any D.P.C. for promotion on the post of Circle Officer till the next date of listing. Post the matter on 19.10.2020.