SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Jhk) 4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Pramath Patnaik, J.
Parwati Nag - Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. - Respondents
WP(S) No. 3703 of 2008
Decided On : 10-01-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha
For the Respondents: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Shani

Headnote:State Service Law - Illegally obtained the document of Schedule Tribe after the marriage with Schedule Tribe person - A denial of appointment s not illegal on the basis that document produces was fraud and she canyt be considered in either f the category be it General or Schedule cast - no illegality in the decision.

JUDGMENT :

Pramath Patnaik, J.

In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for direction upon the respondents to appoint her on the post of the Police Constable in pursuance to the Advertisement No. 1/2004.

2. The brief facts, leading to filing of the writ application, is that by virtue of marriage of the petitioner with one Durga Charan Nag belonging to the Scheduled Tribe, a caste certificate was issued under the signature of the Block Development Officer, Jamshedpur, vide Certificate No. 5060, dated 29.11.2003 in which she was shown to be a member of the Scheduled Tribe as per Annexure-1 to the writ application. Advertisement No. 1 of 2004 was published in daily newspaper 'Prabhat Khabar', inviting applications from candidates, who were 7th pass for appointment of altogether 12541 posts of the Jharkhand Police Constable and the last date was fixed on 15.2.2004. In pursuance to the said advertisement, the petitioner applied for the same post of the Constable for East Singhbhum District for which there were 519 vacancies. In pursuance to her application, the petitioner got the acknowledgement receipt and the Roll Number. Thereafter, she appeared in the physical as well as written tests conducted by the respondents and she was declared successful in the tests by the Selection Board and accordingly, a merit list of all successful Home Guard candidates was published and the name of the petitioner appeared in Column No. 1 of the merit list for East Singhbhum as per Annexure-6 to the writ application. Thereafter, the petitioner received the call letter from the Respondent No.5, whereby she was directed to appear on 28.4.2005 at Police Centre, Jamshedpur along with required original documents for verification of the certificate and for Medical Test. In the said letter, it was mentioned that during medical test, if she is found fit, she will be appointed and sent for training as evident from Annexure-7 to the writ petition and the petitioner has appeared on 28.4.2005 before the respondents with all the required documents and during verification of her certificates, her entire documents were found to be genuine and she was found medically fit. Due to inaction on the part of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner on the post of Constable, the petitioner has been constrained to knock the door of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of her grievances.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted with vehemence that the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner on the post of constable, amounts to arbitrary and illegal action in spite of the fact that the petitioner has been found successful in her physical and written test. Learned senior counsel further submits that the action of the respondents is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

4. Controverting the averments made in the writ application, a counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent no. 4. In the counter affidavit, it has been submitted that though the petitioner was declared as a successful candidate for the post of the Constable in the Home Guard under reservation quota of Scheduled Tribe candidate and subsequently, after verification, it was revealed that the petitioner before marriage belonged to general category and subsequently, petitioner got married to a man, who belonged to the Scheduled Tribe category and i.e. the reason, for which the petitioner was not appointed, even after her selection. In this regard, the Sergeant Major, Police Line, Jamshedpur, issued a letter vide Memo dated 22.7.2017, which has been annexed as Annexure-A to the counter affidavit.

5. A supplementary counter affidavit on behalf of the Respondent No. 4 has been filed in pursuance to the order dated 29.8.2017 of this Court. In the said affidavit, it has been stated and submitted that according to the Merit List, the last selected candidate of General Category obtaine







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top