9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asan Nathar Paul, Ashutosh Chaturvedi, Advs., Mohit Kaushik, Bhanu Priya Sharma, Advs., For Mukesh Kumar Singh & Co., Amit Pawan, AORs, Tapesh Kumar Singh, AAG, Aditya Pratap Singh, Bhaswati Singh, Advs., Prashant Bhushan, Parijat Kishore, Raj Kishor Choudhary, AORs, Shakeel Ahmed, Anupam Bhati, Nakul Chaudhary, Ram Nath, Malvika Raghavan, Sheeba Fakhruddin Adil, Shantanu Jugtawat, Prashant Agarwal, Amita, Vani Vyas, Ravi Chandra Prakash, Advs., Arvind Gupta, Akshat Srivastava, AORs, Kumar Shivam, Adv., Vatsalya Vigya, AOR, Mayank Sapare, Anil Kumar Sahu, Pran Krishna Jana, Vipin Kumar and Binod Kumar Singh, Advs. JUDGMENT L. Nageswara Rao, J. 1. An advertisement was issued calling for applications for appointment to 384 posts of Police ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lants in the Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 24404-24405 of 2019 and Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 26302-26305 of 2019 filed applications for intervention in the Writ Petitions before the High Court. The Writ Petitions filed by the 42 persons whose services were terminated were allowed by a judgment dated 12.08.2016. A learned Single Judge of the High Court held that the appointment of the Writ Petitioners was irregular. The authorities prepared a revised select list after correcting the irregularities and appointed 43 persons on the basis of their merit in accordance with the Rules. As the Writ Petitioners were appointed after completion of their training and have served the State for a considerable period, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accepted by the Division Bench. The reason given by the High Court for not granting relief to the interveners in the Writ Petitions is that there were no vacancies for their appointments and that they are not similarly situated to the Writ Petitioners. Dissatisfied with dismissal of LPAs, the interveners in the Writ Petitions and the State Government have filed these Appeals. 5. We have heard Mr. P.S. Patwalia and Mr. Venkataramani, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf the intervenors in the Writ Petitions, Mr. Deepak Nargolkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the intervenors in these Appeals, Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Jharkhand and Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned Counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elect list, the Writ Petitioners were replaced by others who secured more marks than them. Learned Additional Advocate General made an attempt to distinguish the judgment of this Court in Vikas Pratap Singh's case (supra) by arguing that the period of service rendered by the Writ Petitioners is much lesser than the period of service of those in the case decided by this Court. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that 39 out of 42 Writ Petitioners were reinstated due to the orders passed in Contempt proceedings after being informed that the reinstatements were subject to the result of these Appeals. According to the learned Additional Advocate General, the statement made on behalf of the Government that there were no vacancies f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the select list that was prepared in an irregular manner. However, the High Court found that the Writ Petitioners were not responsible for the irregularities committed by the authorities in preparation of the select list. Moreover, the Writ Petitioners were appointed after completion of training and worked for some time. The High Court was of the opinion that the Writ Petitioners ought to be considered for reinstatement without affecting the rights of other candidates who were already selected. A similar situation arose in Vikas Pratap Singh's case (supra), where this Court considered that the Appellants-therein were appointed due to an error committed by the Respondents in the matter of valuation of answer scripts. As there was no alle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yond those advertised. The contention on behalf of the interveners in the Writ Petitions is that they cannot be ignored when relief is granted to the Writ Petitioners who were less meritorious than them. We are unable to agree. Relief granted to Writ Petitioners is mainly on the ground that they have already been appointed and have served the State for some time and they cannot be punished for no fault of theirs. The intervenors are not similarly situated to them and they cannot seek the same relief. The other ground taken by the intervenors in the Writ Petitions before us is that relief was denied to them only on the basis of a wrong statement made on behalf of the State Government that there were no vacancies. No doubt, the intervenors ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
