STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND SUGARCANE, RANCHI Vs. PRASHANT VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. A very short issue is involved in the present controversy but it has repercussion upon the career of the writ petitioner, i.e., whether petitioner, who had already acquired working experience of 19 years 8 months in Holy Cross Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Hazaribagh and beside it he worked as Research Scholar for 3 years 3 months in Vidhan Chandra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, West Bengal was an eligible candidate in terms of the advertisement no. 3/2010, published on 20.2.2010? As per the eligibility given in the said advertisement, one was eligible for the post who had (a) 20 years working experience, (b) 5 years administrative experience.

(2.) The petitioner's contention was that during the course of Ph.D., he was assigned several works which includes field work and, therefore, he acquired working experience of 3 years 3 months while working as Research Scholar, which made him eligible candidate for consideration for the post in question. The petitioner also placed on record the certificate obtained from Vidhan Chandra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, West Bengal. The learned single Judge, after considering the petitioner's those certificates, sent the matter back to the authority concerned to again determine the petitioner's eligibility in terms of the condition mentioned in the advertisement and to take a decision and if he is found to be eligible candidate, then the respondent may proceed accordingly.

(3.) Apprehension of the appellant is that in view of the observation made in the impugned judgment dated 2.7.2012, it may be construed that the eligibility has been finally determined by the learned single Judge himself as it has been held that the petitioner completed working experience of 20 years or more than 20 years and his work as Research Scholar in view of the certificate given by the University is working experience, equivalent to the work experience in the light of the said advertisement. After going through the reasons given in the impugned judgment and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that there is no ambiguity even in the mind of the respondent that the learned single Judge has finally determined the eligibility of the petitioner and then sent the matter back to the concerned authority for determination of the eligibility of the petitioner. The learned single Judge has remitted the matter back to examine the petitioner's contention and the relevant certificate and to find out whether he is eligible candidate in terms of the working experience prescribed. We are making it clear that learned single Judge has not recorded the findings with respect to the certificate or experience of the petitioner in any manner. However, the authorities are required to consider the issue absolutely independently and after taking into account all the facts and after giving opportunity to the writ petitioner for arriving at a conclusion whether the petitioner has completed 20 years work experience or not. So far as the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that petitioner was lacking administrative experience of 5 years which is also a mandatory condition in the advertisement; that issue is also required to be examined by the concerned authorities themselves to find out whether it was the mandatory condition in addition to work experience or it was an additional qualification.