RANJAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for quashing the letter No. 5/Ni 1-02/07/198 dated 05.06.2008 issued by the Director (Higher Education) Human Resource Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi (Respondent No. 3) and further prayer has been made for holding and declaring that the aforesaid letter issued by the Respondent No. 3 is completely illegal, arbitrary and for ulterior purposes and further for direction upon the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (Respondent No. 4) to send the recommendation of the candidates from the approved panel prepared for the vacancies till 2009 and for direction upon the Jharkhand Public Service Commission to consider the case of the petitioner and recommend his name for his appointment in Commerce faculty against the existing vacancy of the said faculty.

(2.) The facts in brief, are that the petitioner is an M.Com Ist Class and has also qualified the Jharkhand State Eligibility Test for Lecturership held on 111.2006 in the subject of Commerce conducted by Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi. It has been further stated that an Advertisement No. 01/2007 dated 30.01.2007 was published by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi in local daily newspaper 'Hindustan' for appointment of Lecturers in the various colleges of different universities of Jharkhand State and the said advertisement was published for filling up of 1045 numbers of vacancies in the various colleges and Department of different Universities of Jharkhand State. It has been further submitted that petitioner being eligible in all respects made his application for appointment on the post of Lecturer in Commerce Department. It has been further averred that the Jharkhand Public Service Commission after thorough scrutiny of the candidature of the petitioner called the petitioner to appear in the Interview on 23.06.2007 vide letter No. 379/2007 issued by the respondent no. 5. It has been further submitted that the petitioner in pursuance of the said letter appeared in the interview alongwith all original certificates and related documents and the petitioner performed quite well in the said interview and was hopeful of being recommended for his appointment, but, the petitioner was disappointed as his name was not found place in the result dated 14.01.2008, wherein, recommendation for appointment of Lecturer in various subject in different colleges have been made. It has been further submitted that under the Right to Information Act, the petitioner made an application to get information regarding the cut off marks in the Commerce subject and the Public Information officer, J.P.S.C. vide letter dated 05.03.2009 informed the petitioner that he has obtained 54 marks in academic eligibility and 25 marks in the interview and that cut off marks for the general candidates in Commerce subject is 80 marks. From the aforesaid information, it is quite obvious that the petitioner has obtained 79 marks, whereas, the cut off marks in Commerce subject was 80 marks and was next to be considered in the zone of consideration as he has obtained 79 marks. It has been further submitted that inspite of the aforesaid recommendation sent by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, still various vacancies have been left out and the said vacancies was to be filled up through the approved panel, which also contains the name of the petitioner as the panel has been prepared by the expert who has conducted the interview of the candidates and was to be valid upto the vacancies till 2009. It has been further averred that before conducting interview of the petitioner and other candidates as per the guidelines of the University Grants Commission, State Level Eligibility Test (S.L.E.T.) for lecturership was to be conducted for probable vacancies in the State both existing as well as anticipated for next three years as evident from proforma duly signed by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. It has been further submitted that as evident from details of the vacancy position of lecturers in the Universities of Jharkhand State duly signed by the Registrar of all the three universities besides counter signature of the Director, Human Resource Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi (Respondent No. 3) dated 202006 and there were sufficient number of vacancies in various universities as on 21.12005. It has further been submitted that even after the recommendation dated 14.01.2008 made by the J.P.S.C., there are several vacant posts of lecturers in different subjects including Commerce in the Universities of Jharkhand and as evident from the letter dated 21.05.2008 and the enclosure therein, there are vacancy in different subjects including Commerce. It has been submitted that in spite of the aforesaid facts that there is a vacancy and Jharkhand Public Service Commission is bound to send recommendation for the empanelled candidates from the panel prepared by the expert in pursuance of the interview conducted for the same. However, Respondent No. 3 has issued a letter dated 05.06.2008 informing the respondent no. 5 that appointment process has been concluded and for new transaction, requisition will be transmitted. Left with no alternative, the petitioner has been constrained to knock the door of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the action of the Respondent No. 3 is illegal, arbitrary, against the law and the said letter has been issued for ulterior purposes without any cogent reason. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, as on today, there are still sufficient number of vacancies in various subjects including the commerce subject in all the three Universities of Jharkhand State and as such, the petitioner who has obtained 79 marks in Commerce subject and in the said subject, the cut off marks has been 80, is bound to be considered for his appointment. Learned counsel further submits that the action on the part of the respondents is violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel further submits that the respondent no. 4 is bound to send recommendation of the candidates in various faculties for their appointment against the existing vacancies till 2009. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is entitled to be considered and the respondent no. 4 is bound to send his recommendation in view of the fact that in Commerce Faculty, there is still vacancies of the year upto 2009. Learned counsel further submits that the respondents cannot be allowed to defeat the right of the petitioner who has legitimate expectation for his appointment against the existing vacancies and for which the expert has approved the panel. Learned counsel further submits that the respondents cannot be allowed to act illegally and stop the process of filling of the vacancies on the basis of approved panel which has been prepared by the authority keeping in view the existing vacancies till 2009.