IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI.
W.P. (S) No. 248 of 2008
...
Braj Kishore Prasad ... ... Petitioner
-V e r s u s-
The State of Jharkhand & Others ... Respondents.
...
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK.
...
For the Petitioner : - Mr. Saurav Arun, Advocate.
For the Respondent-State : - J.C. to Sr. S.C. I.
...
3/04.02.2009
Petitioner in this writ application has prayed for issuance of a
direction to the Respondents especially the Respondent No. 3 for issuing a letter
of appointment to the petitioner on the Grade IV post in his office in pursuance to
the letter vide memo No. 548 dated 31.10.2005 (Annexure-2), issued by the
Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, by which it was informed that the petitioner
has been selected as successful candidate and found suitable for appointment to
the Grade IV posts.
The facts of the petitioner’s case in brief is that in response to the
advertisement vide No. 02 of 2002 (Annexure-1) issued on 24.04.2002, inviting
applications from the candidates on the Class IV posts, the petitioner had
submitted his application. He was allotted an admit-card to enable him to appear
at the written examination. The petitioner had appeared at the written Test and
also at the Medical Test, which was held on 24.07.2005. The results of the Tests
were published in which the petitioner’s name was included in the panel of the
selected candidates. On the basis of the results, the Deputy Commissioner of the
Hazaribagh District vide his letter dated 31.10.2005 (Annexure-2), directed the
Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Hazaribagh (Respondent No. 3), to
issue a letter of appointment to the petitioner.
The grievance of the petitioner is that despite such directions and
the fact that the petitioner was declared successful in the examinations conducted
for recruitment to the Grade IV posts, the Respondent No. 3 has been illegally and
arbitrarily withholding the issuance of the appointment letter to him.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
counsel for the Respondent-State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to Annexure-3,
which is a copy of the order passed by a Single Bench of this Court in the case of
Shambhu Prasad & Others-versus-State of Jharkhand & Others vide W.P. (S)
No. 6074 of 2006, submits that a similar issue was raised by another successful
candidate and on considering the fact that despite the writ petitioner being
declared successful in the results of the examinations and despite the
recommendations of the Deputy Commissioner, the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief
Medical Officer, Hazaribagh did not issue the appointment letter, this Court held
that there was no genuine reason for the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical
Officer to withhold the issuance of the appointment letter and therefore had
directed the civil surgeon to issue the appointment letter to the writ petitioner
therein. Learned counsel submits that the case of the petitioner stands on identical
footing.
Learned counsel for the Respondent-State submits that on
considering the facts stated in the writ application, an appropriate direction may
be issued to the Respondents to consider the petitioner’s case and to pass
appropriate orders in accordance with law.
In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner
is directed to file a fresh representation enclosing a copy of this order, stating his
claim and the grounds in support thereof and annexing all relevant documents
thereto and within six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, the
Respondent No. 3 shall consider the same and pass a reasoned and speaking order
thereon and effectively communicate such decision to the petitioner. If on
verification, the petitioner’s claim is found genuine, the Respondent No. 3 shall
pass necessary orders for issuance of letter of appointment to the petitioner.
With these observations, this writ application stands disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the
Respondent-State.
(D.G.R. Patnaik, J.)
APK