NARESH HEMBRAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents for appointment to the post of police constable in view of advertisement No. 01/10.

(2.) The factual exposition as has been delineated in the writ petition is that an advertisement was floated by the respondent-State for appointment to the police constables vide advertisement No. 01/10. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner having requisite qualification and eligibility criteria, applied for the same and thereafter, admit card was issued to that effect. On receipt of the admit card, the petitioner appeared in the in the recruitment process and was declared successful in all the events. Subsequently, call letter was issued to him vide memo No.753 dated 03.05.2012 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). In the said call letter, it was specifically mentioned that petitioner should appear before the Superintendent of Police, Godda on 13.05.2012 for verification of his documents. It is the specific case of the petitioner that as he did not receive the call letter on time due to the laches on the part of the respondents, he could not appear before the Superintendent of Police, Godda on 13.05.2012 and thereafter, he appeared before him on 23.08.2013. As the respondents did not consider the case of the petitioner though he qualified in all the events and he could not appeared before the respondents due to the laches on the part of the respondents, the petitioner preferred writ petition before this Hon'ble Court bearing W.P.(S) No. 3581 of 2014 and this Court vide order dated 11.08.2015 disposed of the said writ petition after hearing the counsel for the parties with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances within a period of ten weeks and order to that effect was to be passed in accordance with law. Pursuant thereto, the respondents have passed a reasoned order dated 17.03.2016 in accordance with law, which is at Annexure-8 to the writ petition and is under challenge in the instant writ petition as it was not passed in consonance with the earlier order passed by this Hon'ble Court. Nothing has been considered and the observations of this Hon'ble Court has not been taken into consideration while passing the order dated 17.03.2016 and as such being aggrieved with said order, the petitioner has been compelled to knock the door of this Court.

(3.) Mr. K.K. Ojha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that as the petitioner has been issued call letter, he is entitled for appointment to the post of police constable. Learned counsel further submits that it was laches on the part of the respondents that he had received the call letter much after the due date on which he was required to appear before the respondents and as such, fault cannot be attributed to the petitioner, it was respondents, who are at fault, not the petitioner and this Hon'ble Court earlier taking into consideration the fault on the part of the respondents has directed to consider his case in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argues that the impugned order dated 17.02016 is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eyes of law.