2024 Supreme(Jhk) 832
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.N. PATHAK, J.
Dr. Prishila Soren, D/o. Bisha Soren and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(S) No. 1435 of 2022 With W.P.(S) No. 257 of 2020
Decided On : 05-12-2024
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Adv., Ms. Tejaswita Safalta, Adv., Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Adv., Ms. Tanya Singh, Adv.
For the State : Mr. K.K. Singh, SC-V Mr. S. Bhowmik, AC to SC-V, Mr. Divyam, AC to SC-IV, Mr. Anis Kumar Mishra, AC to Sr. SC-I, Mr. Ranjan Kumar, AC to Sr. SC-I, Ms. Nirupama Kumari, AC to Sr. SC-II, Ms. Sunita Kumari, AC to Sr. SC-II, Ms. Mohini Gupta, AC to SC(M)-I, Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, AC to SC-III, Mr. Law Kumar Tiwary, AC to AAG-V, Mr. Krishna Prajapati, AC to SC-V, Ms. Ashwini Bhushan, AC to Sr. SC-II
For the JPSC :Mr. Sanjoy Piprawal, Advocate, Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate, Mr. Jay Prakash, Advocate
For the Universities : Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, Adv., Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, Adv., Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv., Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Adv., Ms. Ayushri, Adv., Mr. Subhashish Rasik Soren, Adv., Mr. Arpan Mishra, Adv., Mr. Rahul Kamlesh, Adv.
For the Chancellor : Mr. Prashant Pallav, Adv., Mr. Parth Jalan, Adv., Ms. Shivani Jaluka, Adv.
For the Birsa Agricultural University :Mr. Abdul Allam, Sr. Adv., Mr. Faisal Allam, Adv., Ms. Sushmita Kumari, Advocate Ms. Asfia Sultana, Adv.
For the Jamshedpur Women’s University : Mr. A.K. Rashidi, Adv., Mr. Azam, Adv., Ms. Aulia Begum, Adv., Mr. Dinesh Kumar Sahu, Adv.
The court emphasized the need for regular appointments over ad-hoc arrangements in educational institutions to ensure quality education and compliance with established norms.
Headnote:(A) Jharkhand Pado Evum Sewaon Ki Riktion Mein Arakshan (Anushuchit Jation, Anusuchit Janjation Evum Pichchre Vergon Ke Liye Adhinium - 2001 Amendment Act, 2011 - Breach of understanding regarding contractual appointments - Petitioners challenged termination of services and replacement by new appointees, asserting violation of principles of natural justice and established norms. (Paras 3, 5, 18, 22)
(B) Ad-hoc appointments - Court emphasized the detrimental effects of ad-hocism on educational quality and the need for a uniform policy for appointments to avoid arbitrary practices. (Paras 5, 12, 28)
(C) Recruitment process - Court directed the State and Universities to take effective measures for timely recruitment and regularization of teaching positions, highlighting the urgency due to significant vacancies affecting educational standards. (Paras 31, 34)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, previously appointed as contractual faculty, were terminated and replaced by new appointees, leading to claims of unfair treatment and violation of established norms. The court noted the alarming state of faculty vacancies in Jharkhand's Universities, emphasizing the negative impact on educational quality.
Findings of Court:
The court directed the State and Universities to streamline recruitment processes, ensure timely appointments, and address the issue of ad-hocism in faculty appointments.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of replacing one set of ad-hoc employees with another and the broader implications of ad-hoc appointments on educational quality.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the practice of ad-hoc appointments undermines educational standards and directed the State to prioritize regular appointments to enhance the academic environment.
Result: Writ petitions disposed of with directions for immediate action on recruitment.
JUDGMENT :
(S.N. Pathak, J.)
Heard the parties.
2. The issues involved in all these accompanied writ petitions are same, similar and identical and as such they have been tagged and heard together and common orders are being passed.
3. Petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 1435 of 2022 have prayed for the
(i) For showing cause to the Respondents as to under what circumstances they have breached their own understanding as recorded by this Hon'ble Court in Order dated 23.08.2021 passed in W.P.(S) No. 548/2021 (Prabhas Gorai Vrs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and it's batch cases whereby and whereunder the Respondents in relation to the similarly situated contractual appointees/ Assistant Professors working under them, made an undertaking before this Hon'ble Court that they will not oust or terminate or replace them with another set of contractual employees on the principle that "One set of contractual employees cannot be replaced by another set of contractual employees and after the liberty to appoint another group of Contractual Assistant Professors vide Advertisement No. 35/20 dated 18.12.2020 have now reversed their stand by way of deciding to oust/replace the Petitioners and to retain the subsequently appointed Contractual Appointees who have been appointed vide Advertisement No. 35/20 dated 18.12.2020 in the year 2021 and 2022; (ii) For issuance of writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) of appropriate nature for quashing the Notification No. 27/22 contained in Memo No. SKMU/RG/191/2022 dated 07.03.2022, (Annexure-11 of the writ petition) whereby and whereunder the services of the Petitioners who were duly appointed contractual teachers in the subject of Political Science, have been terminated against the settled principle of law of "last come first go' or "first come last go” and without complying with the principles of natural justice;
(iii) For issuance of appropriate writ(s) / order(s) /direction(s) for directing upon the Respondent no. 3 to reinstate the petitioners to their respective post of contractual faculty in their subject and allow them to continue on their post and not to disturb their services till regular appointment is made as per the mandate of law as has been held and ordered by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.S. No. 861/2011 (Ritesh Ranjan and Anr. V. State of Jharkhand and Ors and in similar cases;
(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s) / direction(s) for directing upon the Respondent no. 3 to extend the contract of the petitioners for a period of three years as has been done in case of other appointees appointed from the same advertisement or till regular appointments are done whichever is earlier.
4. The petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 257 of 2020 have prayed for the following reliefs: following reliefs:
(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Advertisement No. 5/2018 (Annexure-3), issued under the signature of respondent no. 5 in respect of backlog vacancies for the post of Assistant Professor in different Universities within the State of Jharkhand as the same is violative of the provisions of Section 4(6) of the “Jharkhand Pado Evum Sewaon Ki Riktion Mein Arakshan (Anushuchit Jation, Anusuchit Janjation Evum Pichchre Vergon Ke Liye Adhinium – 2001 Amendment Act, 2011”wherein it has been provided that the vacancies of the post be carry forwarded for three years, as such the vacant posts, in case of unavailability of suitable candidates (Appointment/Promotion) during two appointment years, the State Government is empowered to fill up the post during the third year by adopting special recruitment procedure for reserved posts.
5. The main issue involved in all these writ petitions is “whether one set of ad hoc employees can be replaced by another set of fresh ad hoc employees”. In the instant batch of writ petitions, some other candidates have been appointed on contractual basis after the appointment of petitioners and they were retained on the said post, whereas the petitioners, who were appointed
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
