BIJAYA PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ application praying therein to appoint her in the post of Inter Trained Teacher for Class 1 to 5 as she has already passed the examination and has secured marks much higher than the cut-off as prescribed by the respondents.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that she, pursuant to an Advertisement, applied for the post of Inter Trained Teacher and thereafter in the examination she has secured 53.51%. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that in spite of the fact that she has obtained 53.51% she was not called for counselling and her case was not considered. The petitioner thereafter filed an application under the Right to Information Act and has sought for the reasons as to why her case was not considered and she was not called for counselling.

(3.) Her query under the Right to Information Act was answered vide letter no. 4263 dated 20.11.2015, wherein the District Superintendent of Education, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa, had informed that she was not considered/ called for counselling as because, as per the Rules, the petitioner has not furnished the mark sheet of matriculation examination.