High Court Jharkhand High Court

Manoj Marshal Murmu & Anr vs Jharkhand State Electricity Bo on 20 September, 2011

Jharkhand High Court
Manoj Marshal Murmu & Anr vs Jharkhand State Electricity Bo on 20 September, 2011
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI            
                         W.P.(S) No. 4391 of 2011 
                                   ­­­­­­­­
       Manoj Marshal Murmu & Another      ...      Petitioners
                                       Versus
        Jharkhand State Electricity Board & others           ...Respondents
                                           ­­­­­­­­
        CORAM:              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL 
                                  ­­­­­­­­
        For the Petitioners  : M/s Delip Jerath, V.K. Vashistha, Abhinesh Kr.,Advocates
        For the Respondents : Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhury, Advocate       
                                  ­­­­­­­­
                       th
        03: Dated 20    September, 2011
                                              

       1.

An   advertisement   was   published   by   the   respondents,   which   is   at 
Annexure­1  to   the   memo  of   the   present   petition  bearing  no.  1   of   2008 
followed   by   several   corrigendum,   which   are   at   Annexure­2   series,   and 
thereby, the qualification originally fixed for the post of Assistant Executive 
Engineer  vide  Annexure­1, which was  only for  Electrical  Engineers, was 
amended   to   the   extent   that   not   only   the   Electrical   Engineers,   but,   the 
Mechanical   Engineers   are   also   eligible   for   the   posts,   in   question.   The 
petitioners being Mechanical Engineers, were also interviewed for the post, 
in   question,   and   thereafter,   they   cleared   all   the   selection   tests   and 
ultimately, they were selected for the said post and were placed at serial 
nos. 45 and 11, respectively, as per Annexure­7 series to the memo of the 
present   petition.   There   are   altogether   45   vacancies   for   the   post,   in 
question, and the petitioners were selected at serial nos. 45 and 11, but, 
because   of   some   misunderstanding,   the   petitioners   were   not   appointed 
because   they   were   Mechanical   Engineers.   It   is   further   submitted   by   the 
counsel for the petitioners that few other candidates have also filed several 
writ  petitions,  one  of  them  is  W.P.(S)  No. 583  of  2010  and those  batch 
matters have already been decided by this Court by a common order dated 
30th  March, 2011, which is  at Annexure­11 to the  memo of the  present 
petition,   wherein,   the   corrigendum   issued   by   the   respondents   has   been 
held   to   be   a   valid   one.   Thus,   the   petitioners   are   also  eligible   for   being 
appointed to the post, in question, though they are Mechanical Engineers 
and for no reason, whatsoever, the respondents are not appointing them 
and hence, the present writ petition has been preferred.

2. Counsel for the respondents submitted that since the issue, involved 
in this writ petition, has already been settled, they have nothing much to 
2.
oppose the matter and the petitioners may be directed to be appointed on 
the post of Assistant Executive Engineer.  

3. In view of this limited submissions and looking to the reasons, given 
in the order, passed by this Court dated 30th March, 2011 in W.P.(S) No. 583 
of   2010   alongwith   other   allied   matters,   corrigendum   issued   by   the 
respondents,   making   Mechanical   Engineers   also   eligible   for   the   post,   in 
question, and as the petitioners have already been selected for the post, in 
question, at serial nos. 45 and 11, respectively, in the select list (Annexure­7 
series   to   the   memo   of   the   present   writ   petition),   I   hereby,   direct   the 
respondents to allow the petitioners to join the post of Assistant Executive 
Engineer. The petitioners shall approach respondent no. 2/or respondent 
no.  3 for   joining  the  duties  as  Assistant Executive   Engineer  within  forty 
days from today.   

4. Similarly, W.P.(S) No. 6091 of 2009 has  also been  allowed by this 
Court vide judgment/order dated 26th July, 2011. 

5. I hereby, also direct the respondents to allow the petitioners to place 
at   appropriate   serial   number,   looking   to   their   serial   nos.   45   and   11, 
respectively, in the select list, which is at Annexure­7 series to the memo of 
the  present petition  and it  will be  communicated  to the  petitioners that 
what their respective serial numbers in the same batch. 

6. This writ petition is allowed and disposed of, in view of the above 
directions.     

           (D.N. Patel, J. )
VK