The court established that under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, there cannot be a direction for regularization of services. The nature of appointment, acceptance of contractual terms, and absence of recruitment process for permanent vacancies were crucial in determining the petitioners' entitlement to regularization, equal pay, and minimum pay-scale.

ORDER :

1. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the State, the Court made the following order, (per S.K. Mishra, C.J.)

2. In this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for the following relief:

“For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) from the Hon’ble Court commanding upon the concerned respondent for regularization of the services of the petitioners in the post of Para Teacher now designated as Asst. Teacher, who have been appointed/engaged by the respective District Authority i.e. Deputy Commissioner of Dhanbad, State of Jharkhand and these Para Teachers are duly appointed/engaged for teaching in the schools of Jharkhand from Block to District level Schools and they have duly passed the Teachers Eligibility Test Examination conducted by Jharkhand Academic Council and they have passed the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) Examination and they are working since about last 5-15 years. Their services be regularized as per their seniority by the State of Jharkhand/Deputy Commissioner concerned considering a number of vacancy of Teachers in different schools of Jharkhand from Primary level to Middle level in all 24 districts.

And further direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners against the sanctioned post and on the vacant post of Assistant Teachers on the basis of valid appointment from the post of Para Teacher now designated as Asst. Teacher by following the law constitution and also their service on the post of Asst. Teacher because they have already completed more than 240 day continuation of service. The petitioner’s appointment was made by regular basis on recommendation, Confirmation approval of Deputy Commissioner/Chairman District Education Committee.

And further respondent State may kindly be directed to pay the salary of the Para Teachers now designated as Asst. Teachers equivalent to salary paid to other Assistant Teachers, other allowances in which these Para Teachers are working in the schools where they are working as Para Teachers in the same capacity, in which Assistant Teachers are working holding the same qualification, and they passed the Teacher Eligibility Test Examination working as a Para Teacher conducted by Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi on the sanctioned post of Assistant Teachers.

And further it is prayed that the Rule framed vide notification No. 1632 dated 05.09.2012 (Annexure 2) is ultra virus and against the constitutional provision of Article 14, 16, 21 of the Constitution of India and against the Principle of Natural Justice depriving the Para Teachers/Asst. Teachers who are working since last more than 14 years. They are fully qualified and they have passed the Teacher Eligibility Test Examination and no provision has been made for regularization of their services as per their seniority the post of Assistant Teachers to Para Teachers of all the 24 district of Jharkhand.

And further respondent State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand/Secretary HRD Govt. of Jharkhand may kindly be directed to call for the Rule/regulation framed by the State of Bihar, U.P., M.P., Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Madras, Assam and other State Govt. regarding regularization from the post of Para Teacher on the vacant post of Assistant Teacher in the Primary/Middle Schools on the basis of seniority and passing the Teacher Eligibility Test Examination the service of Para Teachers working since more than 14 years also be regularized in vacant post of Assistant Teachers from Para Teachers as per their seniority on the basis of Rules/Regulation framed by the States as stated above and respondent State Govt. in the interest of Children of the Govt. run Primacy/Middle Schools Class I to V and VI to VIII.”

3. At the outset, learned A.C. to G.P. IV, as well as the counsel for respondent no. 6 ( JEPC) have submitted that the issues, which have been raised in this writ petition have already been settled in W.P.S. No. 315 of 2016 vide judgment dated 16.12.2022.

4. Mr. Naresh Prasad Tha