IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 5250 of 2007
...
Anil Kumar ... ... Petitioner
V e r s u s
The State of Jharkhand & Others ... ... Respondents
...
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR.
...
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate.
For the State : J.C. to Sr. S.C.I
...
5/16.11.2011
It appears that petitioner was earlier appointed as Technical
Assistant in Animal Husbandry Department. However, his services
terminated. The said order of termination was challenged by
petitioner and other persons by filing writ application. It appears that
after dismissal of the said writ application, some of the aggrieved
persons moved to Hon’ble Supreme Court. It then appears that on the
direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court, an examination held in the year
2005 and in which petitioner and others including respondent no. 8
appeared. In the said examination out of total marks i.e. 300 marks,
petitioner obtained 81.250 marks whereas respondent no. 8, who is
also a candidate belonging to General category, had obtained 76.250
marks. It further appears from the Select List (page no. 84 of the writ
petition) that respondent no. 8 was given 90 marks as grace mark. It
is submitted that such grace mark has not been given to the
petitioner and because of that he has not been appointed.
From perusal of counter affidavit filed by respondent nos. 1 to
7, I find that no explanation given as to why no grace mark given to
the petitioner. Accordingly, I direct the respondent nos. 1 to 7 to file
supplementary counter affidavit explaining as to why grace mark was
not given to the petitioner.
Put up this case on 02.12.2011.
(Prashant Kumar, J.)
sunil/
