Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Jhk) 1942
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Deepak Roshan, J
W.P.(S). No. 5888 of 2025
For the Petitioners: Amritansh Vats, Arpan M. Ekka, Ashish Choudhary
For the Respondents: Pradeep Kumar
Residency in a specific 'Beat' area is not a mandatory prerequisite for appointment as a Chowkidar; candidates from neighboring 'Beats' can be considered, and reservation based strictly on permanent residence in a specific beat is legally unsustainable.
Headnote:The case involves the interpretation of the Jharkhand Chowkidar Cadre Rules, 2015 and Clause-9 of Advertisement No. 01 of 2024. The petitioners, having successfully passed the written and physical tests for the post of Chowkidar in the district of Godda, were denied appointment on the grounds that they were not residents of the specific 'Beat' area. The court found that the rejection of the petitioners' claims based solely on their lack of residency in the same 'Beat' was not in accordance with the law. The primary issue is whether residency in the same 'Beat' is a mandatory requirement for appointment to the post of Chowkidar. The court reasoned, relying on previous Division Bench and Coordinate Bench rulings, that the purpose of the residency clause is to ensure smooth functioning by appointing candidates from their residential 'Beat' or neighboring 'Beats', and that absolute reservation based on permanent residence in a specific beat is impermissible. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to reconsider the cases of the petitioners and issue a letter of appointment, if they are otherwise qualified and if there is no other legal impediment.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural modification of parties in a writ petition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. claim for appointment based on qualifying marks and successful completion of recruitment process. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. rejection of candidacy based on specific 'beat' area residency. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. non-mandatory nature of specific 'beat' residency for chowkidar appointments. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. direction to reconsider appointment based on general qualification and legal eligibility. (Para 17 , 18) |
I.A. No. 3249 of 2026
05/ 02.07.2026
1. This application has been preferred by the petitioners for deleting the name of petitioner Nos. 5, 6 and 7, as the grievance of those petitioners have been redressed.
2. There is no objection from the respondents.
3. Accordingly, I.A. No. 3249 of 2026 stands allowed.
4. Counsel for the petitioners is directed to make necessary correction in the cause title of the writ application, in course of the day.
W.P.(S). No. 5888 of 2025
5. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken-up for hearing today.
6. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners praying therein for following reliefs:
(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order (s), direction (s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for appointment on the post of Chowkidar, pursuant to advertisement No. 01of 2024 issued under the pen and signature of respondent no. 2.
(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order (s), direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue appointment letter to the petitioners on the post of chowkidar, pursuant to advertisement No. 1 of 2024 issued by the respondent no. 2 as all the petitioners appeared in the recruitment process, because successful in the written test and physical test, and the petitioners have secured more than qualifying marks.
(iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order (s), direction (s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondent, in particular respondent no. 2 to issue the result of rest 167 number of vacancies, as the total posts advertised were 276 whereas the result of only 109 posts have been published.
(iv) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order (s), direction (s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondent that during the pendency of this writ petition, the respondents be directed to keep 8 number of post of Chowkidar vacant in the district of Godda for the petitioner, pursuant to advertisement No. 01 of 2024.
7. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners applied for the post of Chowkidar pursuant to Advertisement No. 01 of 2024 issued for 276 total vacancies in the district of Godda. The written test for the said post was held on 08.10.2024, and the petitioners were successfully shortlisted in the public notices issued on 13.12.2024 and 14.12.2024. They subsequently appeared for and successfully passed the rigorous physical tests conducted on 16.12.2024, 17.12.2024, and 19.12.2024.
8. Thereafter, an order containing the final result was issued on 04.01.2025, in which 167 posts were shown to be vacant. It was also found that candidates possessing lesser marks than the petitioners, were declared successful in the Godda district merit list, despite similar recruitment processes being completed fairly based on marks in all other districts of the State.
9. Subsequently, the petitioners being aggrieved by the respondents; approached the authorities by submitting a representation dated 07.01.2025 praying that the results for the rest of the 167 vacancies be published and the petitioners may be considered for appointment.
However, no action has been taken by the respondents. Hence this writ petition.
10. Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that the petitioners were provisionally selected, but the provisional list was withdrawn on
