- (1.) 06/02.12.2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) Order dated 07.10.2015 is quoted below, which also encapsulates the grievances of the petitioner, wherein directions were issued to the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau to enquire into the aspect dealt therein: - "After the directions passed in W.P .(S) No. 6251 of 2009, the Child Development Project Officer, Chhatarpur, Palamau, respondent no. 6 has passed the impugned reasoned order (Annexure -5) dated 4th September, 2012 bearing Memo no. 254 after hearing the petitioner, canceling her selection as Anganbari Sevika of Centre Khatin -III and directing holding of fresh Aam Sabha. The reason apparent from the impugned order being that the petitioner does not belong to the majority of beneficiary population of Backward Class of the said centre as she is a schedule caste lady and her selection is contrary to the prescribed norms laid down under letter no. 585 dated 2nd June, 2006 of the department of Social Welfare, Women and Child Development, Government of Jharkhand. Petitioner has not been able to dislodge the aforesaid finding that Scheduled Caste Community does not belong to majority beneficiary population of Centre Khatin -III, for which selection was made. It appears from the impugned order that altogether 11 candidates had participated in the selection exercise and some of them belonged to the Backward Class. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent by Child Development Project Officer, Chattarpur, namely, Anita Kumari wife of Sanjay Prasad however, takes a complete volte face in statement made at para -14. It seeks to uphold the selection of the petitioner stating that except petitioner none of the applicants were suitable candidate. The stand taken by the respondents, in their counter affidavit, defies reason. It goes contrary to the findings recorded in the reasoned order itself by the officer holding the same post of Child Development Project Officer, Chattarpur. It is therefore considered proper that the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau should inquire into the matter and file an affidavit sworn by responsible officer of the district on the subject matter. If the Deputy Commissioner comes to a finding of lapse in official duty on the part of the concerned officer, he may proceed in accordance with law against the said officer as well, of course, after due opportunity to the concerned person. Let such an affidavit be filed within a period of six weeks. List this case after six weeks i.e, on 26th November, 2015."
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on 30.11.2015 on behalf of the respondent nos. 4 to 6. Learned counsel for the State submits that matter was enquired through Additional District Magistrate(Law and Order), Palamau. According to the report submitted by him, a decision to appoint non BC Category candidate in the area covered by BC Caste has been found against the provision/circular of the Government. Deputy Commissioner, Palamau has issued show cause notice to the concerned Child Development Project Officer, Chhatarpur, district Palamau and after getting her reply, appropriate action would be taken. Annexures -A & B are in support thereof. On the merits of the matter, it is stated on their part that the selection of Aaganbari Sevika for the centre Khatin -3, Chhatarpur Block, which was held on 04.11.2006, was attended by 11 candidates.;