RANCHI, India, Aug. 5 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on July 4:
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Since common issues are involved in all these writ applications, as such it was heard together and decided by this common judgment.
3. Dr. Shree Krishna Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner in W.P.(S) no. 1014/2015 [Arun Kumar Mishra vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors] had requested to treat the referred case as the lead case which has been duly supported by the other counsels for the respective petitioners of other cases coupled with the fact that a comprehensive affidavit was filed pursuant to an order passed by this Court in the said case; W.P.(S) no. 1014/2015 [Arun Kumar Mishra Case] has been taken as a lead case for proper adjudication of the issue involved in the all these writ applications.
Even learned counsels appearing for the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Universities, Central Bureau of Investigation and State did not object and agreed to assist the Court on facts and laws in reference to all other analogous cases.
4. Based upon the facts as has been narrated in the comprehensive affidavit filed in WPS no. 1014/2025, Dr. Shree Krishna Pandey contended that the present cases have been filed with prayers for quashing the entire process of selection, right from Advertisement till appointments of Lecturers, in different Universities of the State of Jharkhand by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission pursuant to Advertisement no. 01/2007. He taking reference to order dated 22.06.2006 passed in W.P.(S) NO. 1059/2006, asserted that this Court had passed certain directions for the purposes of conducting the recruitment process of Lecturers; however, the same was ignored by the respondents, while conducting the recruitment process after Advertisement no. 01/2007.
5. Learned counsel further submits that the Jharkhand Public Service Commission came with the aforementioned Advertisement and in blatant violation of the statutory rules/notifications for the purpose of appointment of Lecturers, declared the result on 15.01.2008. In furtherance of the same, the recommended candidates of the JPSC were appointed by the Universities.
It was also submitted that the JPSC with ulterior motive also invited applications for the posts of Readers, Professors, Principals etc, which was not inconformity with order dated 22.06.2006 passed in W.P.(S) no. 1059/2006. However, he confined his arguments only in relation to recruitment process of Lecturers.
It was further submitted that during the above process of selection of the Lecturers by the J.P.S.C, mass irregularities was committed by the JPSC leading to lodging of various cases by the State Vigilance Department and subsequently handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation in terms of order dated 14.06.2012 passed in W.P.(PIL) no. 3594/2011 by this Court.
6. Learned counsel taking reference to letter dated 21.04.2011 (Annexure-12 of the comprehensive affidavit), asserted that the Government had taken a decision to cancel the appointments in relation to four examinations and as such it can be validly said that there were no appointments of any candidates.
He accordingly prayed that these writ petitioners who are meritorious and eligible candidates should be given chance for being recruited for the posts they had applied. Accordingly, it has been submitted that the process of appointment of Lecturers in furtherance of Advertisement no. 01/2007 is liable to be quashed in its entirety and these writ petitioners, if eligible, may be given chance for being selected.
7. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners of other writ petitions accept the arguments advance by the Dr. SK Pandey.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=%2FbY2dBB1fxliePvWrCseo26bE4kRgp3THzgpit%2F9%2FUiR2zbRlmBBHyJDX9Pbp1W3&caseno=WPC/2307/2009&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010105482009&state_code=7&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
