IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 2331 of 2011
Bijay Kumar Jayswal ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & ors. ...... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. PATEL
For the Petitioner : M/s Anjani Kumar Verma, Amit Kr. Verma
For the Respondents : Mr. D.K. Dubey, G.P.I
th
02/Dated: 24 August, 2011
1.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially the petitioner and other
persons were appointed as ClassIII employees with the respondents in the then
State of Bihar. Thereafter their services were brought to an end. Thereafter, the
writ petition was preferred which was carried up to the Highest Court and the
Hon’ble Supreme Court had appointed a committee for looking into the
grievances of the similarly situated persons like the petitioner. The Committee
gave a report. Again the report was challenged by way of a writ petition before
the Hon’ble Patna High Court. That writ petition was allowed. Thereafter,
Letters Patent Appeal was also dismissed preferred by the State of Bihar. Thus,
similarly situated persons have already been appointed by the State of Bihar.
2. Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that upon bifurcation of the
State of Jharkhand, similarly situated persons in the State of Jharkhand had
also filed writ petition being W.P. (S) No.5629 of 2010 (annexure14) in which
vide order dated 10th January, 2011 direction was given to the State of
Jharkhand to decide the claim of the petitioners by passing a speaking order
and if the petitioners’ claim is similar to the other similarly situated persons,
then the petitioners may also be given benefit as claimed by them and,
therefore, let similar order be passed by this Court also.
3. Counsel for the respondents submitted that they have no much objection
to scrutinize the legal claim of the petitioner and to give similar treatment like
other petitioners given in W.P. (S) No.5629 of 2010 vide order dated 10 th
January, 2011.
4. In view of this submission and looking into the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case and the decision taken in the earlier writ petition by
Hon’ble Patna High Court, I hereby direct the respondent No. 2 – The Director
inChief, Health Services, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, to treat this writ petition
as a representation along with the Annexures, and also keeping in mind the
earlier decision rendered by the Patna High Court and then decide the claim of
2
the petitioners by passing a speaking order within sixteen weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court and if it is found that the
petitioner is similarly situated candidates like in the earlier writ petition, then
the benefits may be extended to the petitioner also. I also direct respondent No.
2 to give adequate opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or to his
representative and the decision will be taken in accordance with law, rules,
regulations, policies and Government enforceable orders, applicable to the
petitioner after considering the aforesaid decision rendered by the Hon’ble
Patna High Court.
5. In view of the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
(D.N. Patel, J.)
Ajay