KUMAR MUCHKUND Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner's grievance in this writ application is against the appointment of Respondent No. 6 as a Para Teacher in a quite illegal and arbitrary manner.

(3.) The grounds of the petitioner's claim is that, though the petitioner was one of the candidates aspiring for his appointment, but in a most illegal and arbitrary manner, the Respondent No. 6 has been appointed. The further grievance of the petitioner is that against the appointment of the Respondent No. 6, a representation was made to the Respondent No. 2- the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih, but the same has not been considered. It is sought to be explained that the main objection as raised by the petitioner is that on the date of his appointment, the Respondent No. 6 was not eligible for his appointment as Para Teacher, in as much as, he was granted license under Bihar Unification of License Order, 1998 for trading in kerosene oil.