RAMESH KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2009-12-80
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on December 14,2009

RAMESH KUMAR MISHRA Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Jharkhand with Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS appears to be the fourth attempt on the part of the petitioners for seeking directions from this Court to the concerned authorities of the Respondents to take steps for their appointment against the existing vacancies. The petitioners had enrolled themselves in the Employment Exchange. Earlier, their services were engaged on temporary basis for Election duty sometime in the year 1991 -92. After the Election duty was over, the services of the petitioners were no more engaged. The petitioners along with similarly situated other coemployees, had represented before the State Government. Upon considering the grievances, the State Government by its Circular (Annexure -8), had directed that the existing vacancies in the various Collectorates should be filled up immediately. In the Gumla Collectorate, there were 33 vacant posts of Assistants. An advertisement was issued and the applications were received. The names of the petitioners were obtained from the Employment Exchange. However, it is informed that out of the 33 vacancies, only 14 were filled -up by absorption of the earlier retrenched candidates and the remaining vacancies have not been filled up.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners while referring to the order passed by this Court in the earlier writ application vide C.W.J.C. No. 4036 of 1993 (R), submits that a direction was issued to the 10/5/2014 Page 64 Balaji fuels private limited Versus State of jharkhand Deputy Commissioner, Gumla to consider the case of the petitioners in terms of the earlier order dated -27.04.1993, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 807 of 1993 (R) as early as possible, in respect to the petitioner's grievances. Yet, according to the learned counsel, the Respondents have not filled up the vacancies by appointing the petitioners. The further grievance of the petitioners is that in the matter of appointment, they have been discriminated in as much as, though 14 persons similarly situated, were absorbed against the existing vacancies but the remaining vacancies have not been filled up by absorbing the petitioners.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.