The main legal point established in the judgment is that candidates who have secured more marks than the last selected candidates are entitled to be considered for counseling and appointment, especially when vacancies are still available and no fresh advertisement has been issued.

JUDGMENT :

S.N. Pathak, J.

Heard the parties.

2. Since the issues involved in all the aforementioned writ petitions are same and similar, they have been heard together and being disposed of by this common order.

3. Petitioners have approached this Court with a common prayer for direction upon the respondents to consider their candidature in their respective categories i.e. para and non-para category, for the districts for which they have applied for against the vacant seats of Intermediate Trained Teachers.

4. The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. An advertisement was published for appointment of candidates to the post of Intermediate Trained Teachers in different districts of the State of Jharkhand. It is the case of the petitioners that separate advertisements were published by the Office of District Superintendent of Education of the respective districts for appointment of Intermediate Trained Teachers. As per the advertisement, 50% of the seats are required to be filled by Para Teachers and rest 50% seats were to be filled with non para teachers categories. Petitioners, having requisite qualifications, applied for the aforesaid vacancies in their respective para category and non para category in different districts of the State of Jharkhand and submitted their certificates. Further their names have appeared at the respective districts in the data base cum Merit list. Thereafter, several rounds of counseling were held at all the districts and several candidates were called for counseling and were given appointment.

5. Subsequently due to several irregularities, inconsistency and anomalies in the counseling process, several writ applications were filed before this Hon’ble Court and two of the writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 19/2016 with W.P.(S) No. 32/2016 were taken up together and the Hon’ble Court had been pleased to allow the writ petitions vide judgment dated 02.02.2017 directing the Respondent Authorities to make appointment according to merit of the candidates on all unfilled advertised vacancies. Thereafter the Respondent State preferred Letters Patent Appeal, being L.P.A. No. 168/2017, before the Hon’ble Division Bench against the Judgment dated 02.02.2017 passed in W.P.(S) No. 19/2016 with W.P.(S) No. 32/2016. The said L.P.A. was dismissed by the Hon’ble Division Bench vide Judgment dated 11.05.2018 with the specific observation to comply the directions issued at paragraphs 19 and 20 of the Judgment dated 02.02.2017.

Simultaneously on the same day i.e. 11.05.2018 another Letters Patent Appeal being L.P.A. No. 186/2017 with L.P.A. No. 199/2017 filed by the Respondents State against the Judgment dated 02.03.17 passed in W.P.(S) No. 6031 of 2015 and W.P.(S) No. 173 of 2016 was taken up for consideration by the Hon’ble Division Bench and the same was also dismissed and the Hon’ble Division Bench directed the Respondents to consider the application of candidates working as para teachers in the non para category even if they had applied under the non para category.

Further on 13.05.2019 another two sets of writ petitions being W.P.(S.) No. 2142/2019 with analogous cases and W.P.(S) No. 768/2019 with analogous cases were taken up together and were allowed on 13.05.2019 itself wherein the Hon’ble Court had categorically held ate Para 7 of the Judgment (W.P.(S.) No. 2142/2019 dated 13.05.2019) that,

“The Hon’ble Division Bench decided that a Para Teacher can always apply under Non-Para Teacher category as they are not seeking any benefit/advantage of relaxation of age etc. They are not seeking benefit of the reservation clause of Para Teacher category. When this dispute is set at rest, it cannot be said that only those persons, on whose application the issue is resolved, can only get the benefit. Benefit of the decision should be given to all those persons, who are governed by the final judgment. Thus, it is not that only the intervener can get the benefit, but all those Para Teachers, who had applied under Non-Para Teache