The court mandates compliance with prior orders for teacher counseling, emphasizing merit-based inclusion of eligible candidates.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Shankar, J.

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioners to participate in the counselling with respect to appointment on the post of Inter/Graduate Trained Teacher pursuant to the order dated 02.02.2017 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 19/2016 along with other analogous cases which have been affirmed by learned Division Bench vide order dated 11.05.2018 passed in L.P.A. No. 168/2017. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to give priority to the Para Teachers, who are having higher position in the merit list than the last selected candidate and are also having teaching experience. The petitioners have also prayed for directing the respondents to continue with the appointment process till the last existing vacancy of Intermediate/Graduate Trained Teachers and to fill up the remaining seats by appointing the deserving candidates.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner Nos. 1 & 14 have B.Ed. Degree whereas the petitioner Nos. 2 to 13 and 15 to 25 have done Diploma in Primary Education from Indira Gandhi National Open University. The petitioners are the Para Teachers, who are discharging their duties in different schools and have got experience in teaching of more than 15 years. The petitioner Nos. 2 to 13 and 15 to 24 have qualified the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) for Class 1-5 whereas the petitioner Nos. 1, 14 & 25 have qualified the TET for Class 6-8 and they are having experience of teaching as Para Teachers. Pursuant to Advertisement No. 01/2015 issued for appointment of Assistant Teachers in different districts of Jharkhand, the petitioners being the Para Teachers and fulfilling all the required criteria, applied in different districts under Para category, however, they have not been called for counselling, though several candidates under non-Para category having lesser marks than the petitioners have been called for counselling.

3. It is further submitted that a Bench of this Court while considering the similar issue in the case of W.P.(S) No. 2378 of 2019 (Paras Nath Mandal Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and other analogous cases, allowed the same vide order dated 16.02.2022 with following directions :

“18. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid observations, rules, guidelines, legal propositions and judicial pronouncements, I hereby direct the respondents to initiate process of counseling for the present petitioners by way of last opportunity, since they have obtained more marks than the last selected candidates in the merit list. The petitioners shall approach the Deputy Commissioners of the concerned Districts, as early as possible, preferably, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner shall initiate the process of counseling after giving proper notice to the petitioners by way of Press Communique, advertising the notice in the local newspaper having the wide circulation in the concerned Districts and also by putting the notice on the Notice Board of the Office of concerned District Superintendent of Education and thereafter, the entire process of counseling be completed within a period of further four weeks subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria and also if the present petitioners have secured more marks than the last selected candidates.

Let the entire process be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

19. Let it be made clear that no further counselling shall be held for any reasons whatsoever as the advertisement for appointment of these teachers are of 2015 and the aforesaid directions have been issued in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, which shall be not taken as precedent.”

4. The State of Jharkhand, however, preferred L.P.A. No. 203 of 2022 [The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Vs. Paras Nath Mandal] and o