Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) The judgment passed in W.P.S. No. 2168 of 2012, which is sought to be reviewed by the review petitioner, who were respondents in the writ petition is reproduced herein below:- "Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has come before this Court for a direction upon the respondents to consider his case for appointment on the post of Graduate Trained Teachers in +2 schools of the State of Jharkhand in the light of Advertisement No. 74 of 2011 dated 23.7.2011, Advertisement no. 100 of 2011 dated 7.11.2011 and Advertisement no. 117 of 2011dated 24.12.2011 issued by the respondent no. 3, Jharkhand Academic Council. According to the petitioner, as per results contained in Annexure-10, the petitioner had obtained 202 marks, which is more than the cut off marks 186 out of total 300 marks secured by the last candidate, who has been appointed in the category of most backward classes in the subject of Economics. The facts, which are enumerated here-in-below show that it is a hard case. As per advertisement dated 23.7.2011, Annexure-4 being advertisement no. 74 of 2011, applications were invited from interested persons for recruitment of teachers in +2 schools in the State against which vacancies were shown against each subjects. 50% of the posts were to be filled up by direct recruitment in which category the petitioner claims to have been fallen. In the eligibility criteria, it is disclosed that as per the said advertisement, minimum 50% marks in the post graduate subject and B.Ed. degree from a recognised institution were required. The petitioner belongs to the most backward category for which, he has also enclosed the necessary certificate, which is Annexure- 2. However, the petitioner had not obtained the post graduate degree which he was pursuing from Nalanda Open University at that time when he made his application before the cut off date 16.8.2011. His result was subsequently declared on 21.10.2011, Annexure-5, where he has secured 61.13% marks and has secured first class. Thereafter corrigendum Advertisement no. 100 of 2011, Annexure-6, was issued on 7.11.2011 wherein the relaxation was given to the candidates of scheduled caste/scheduled tribes category that the minimum marks required for them to participate was 45% in the post graduate course. The second relaxation was granted to the candidates, who have appeared in B.Ed. Exam. The terms of said corrigendum indicated that those , who have been issued admit card, need not submit their applications once again as they would be allowed to appear on the basis of the said admit card. The petitioner had received his admit card, vide Annexure-7, showing his roll no. 401199 in the most backward category showing date of exam as 30.11.2011. However, the exam was not held on that day and a further advertisement being Advertisement no. 117 of 2011 was published on 24.12.2011, Annexure-8. Under this advertisement as per clause (cha) the earlier advertisements were super-ceded. It was indicated at clause (cha)(i) that such candidates who had made application under the previous Advertisement no. 74 of 2011 and 100 of 2011 and possess the necessary eligibility criteria and qualifications need not furnish their fresh application. The relaxation to the scheduled caste/scheduled tribes candidates as accorded in Advertisement no. 100 of 2011 and also to those who were appearing in B.Ed exam were again incorporated in the present advertisement. The exams thereafter were held on 15.2.2012 and results thereof were published. The petitioner got his result from website in which, he was shown to obtain 202 marks in the most backward category but was shown as not selected with a remarks 'M.A. Appearing'. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that further a corrigendum was issued vide Advertisement no. 11 of 2012 whereby it has been provided that the appearing candidates were permitted to submit their teachers training qualifications duly self attested in the office of Jharkhand Academic Council by 15.3.2012 by speed post. This corrigendum was issued on 16.2.2012. The petitioner, however, realised that results of his final M.A. exam had not been submitted and accordingly, he proceeded to submit the same along with other essential certificates of his educational qualifications by an application dated 5.3.2012, which is staid to have been received on 7.3.2012. In these circumstances, when the petitioner has not been recommended by the J.A.C. for appointment by the respondent-State, Department of Human Resource Development, Government of Jharkhand, he has come before this Court. The respondents-J.A.C. in their counter affidavit has justified their stand of not recommending the petitioner's name on the ground that the petitioner was a candidate, who was appearing in Master of Arts exam at that time when his application was made under Advertisement no. 74 of 2011. The relaxation was given to the candidates who were appearing in the B.Ed. exam under the Advertisement No.100 of 2011. However, the petitioner had not made a fresh application after Advertisement no. 117 of 2011 along with the certificate of post graduation, which superseded the earlier Advertisement nos. 74 of 2011, 80 of 2011 and 100 of 2011. In such circumstances, the respondent-State has not been able to make the appointment. On the last occasion, the respondent-State was asked to file an affidavit stating whether there are any vacant post available. The respondent-State on their part have stated that in the most backward category under direct recruitment quota the seats are no longer available. In such circumstances, the case has been argued on behalf of the parties. These facts, therefore, show that it is a hard case. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appearing in the Master of Arts exam in the Nalanda Open University at the time of making application before the cut off date in Advertisement no. 74 of 2011. The respondent-JAC, however, issued corrigendums to the original advertisement and earlier advertisements were superseded by the last Advertisement no. 117 of 2011 issued on 24.12.2011. By that time the petitioner had passed Master of Arts exam from the Nalanda Open University and results were published on 21.10.2011 itself in which he has secured 61.13% marks and was placed in the first class. However, the petitioner did not make a fresh application, which may have been the requirement under Advertisement no. 117 of 2011. The petitioner, however, was not without any reason in not making such application, as clause (ch)(1) of the said advertisement indicated that those who have applied under Advertisement nos.74 of 2011 and 100 of 2011 and were possessing the necessary qualifications and eligibility, need not make such an application. The petitioner obviously by that time had been issued the admit card and was also possessing the requisite qualification having more than 50% marks in the post graduate exam. In such circumstances, the petitioner alone can not be faulted for having not made a fresh application for appearing in the said exam. He in fact appeared in the said exam on 15.2.2012 and got 202 marks i.e. more marks than the cut off marks i.e. 186 marks obtained by last candidate in the most backward classes category in the subject of Economics. The respondent-JAC, as per the chronology of the facts of the case narrated above, have repeatedly issued the corrigendums one after another, which may have created some confusion in the mind of the appearing candidates. Therefore, the respondent-JAC should not have withheld making of recommendation of the petitioner when he was found to secure 202 marks, more than the cut off marks of 186 in the MBC category. In these circumstances, therefore, the respondent- JAC should consider the case of the petitioner and after scrutiny of all these facts and circumstances, proceed to make an appropriate recommendation to the State Government, Department of Human Resource Development in accordance with law within 8 weeks. The respondent-State, in such circumstances, would give due consideration to the recommendation of the J.A.C. and consider the case of the petitioner for appointment thereafter sympathetically, however, if any vacancy are available. It is made clear that none of the appointed candidates should be disturbed as a result of any such exercise undertaken by the respondent-State. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms".
(3.) The grounds which have been urged by learned counsel for the review petitioner in sum and substance is to the effect that the relaxation of submission of certificates was only granted to the B.Ed. appearing candidates and not to those who were pursuing the Post Graduate courses under the advertisement no. 74 of 2014 and the successive corrigendum, which were issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council in respect of the recruitment of Post Graduate Trained Teachers in +2 schools in the State of Jharkhand.;