Mrs. Sudha Minz, wife of Agapit Horo vs State Of Jharkhand

Ananda Sen, J

Heard  learned  counsel  representing  the  petitioners  and learned counsel representing the respondents.

In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a mandamus upon the respondents to declare the result in relation to the examination conducted to fill up the post of Assistant Teacher in R.C. Primary School, Surhu and R.C. Primary School, Gara, both under the District of Gumla, Jharkhand. The petitioners further prayed that they should be appointed on the aforesaid posts.

Learned counsel representing the respondents submits that the results of examination for both the Schools i.e. R.C. Primary School, Gara and R.C. Primary School, Surhu, have been declared in the year 2022 and both the petitioners have not qualified. He submits that in R.C. Primary School, Gara, there was only one post of Assistant Teacher, against which one Nillu Horo (at serial No.13), had secured 79 marks, which was highest and she was selected and is  working.  So  far  as  R.C.  Primary  School,  Surhu,  is  concerned, he submits that there were two posts and in both the posts, two candidates  namely Pushpa  Surin  (at serial  No.23) and Maria  Clarin Dhanwar (at serial No.14), who were appointed, had obtained more marks than these petitioners. In the said School (in Surhu), Pushpa Surin  and  Maria  Clarin  Dhanwar,  have  obtained  51  marks  and  40 marks respectively, whereas these petitioners have obtained lesser marks than the above-named candidates.

After hearing the parties, I have perused the results. From the results, it is quite clear that these petitioners had obtained much lesser marks than the candidates who have been selected. Further  the  petitioners  have  relied  upon  a document  which  is  the result  published  by  R.C.  Primary  School,  Gara  (Annexure-3  to  the writ petition), but this document is prima facie a manufactured document. I came to the said conclusion after comparing the same with Annexure-B to the counter affidavit and the marks obtained by Nillu Horo (at serial No.13), as projected in Annexure-3 to the writ petition. In Annexure-3 to the writ petition, it has been shown that Nillu  Horo,  has  obtained  69  marks  but  after  totalling  the  individual subject mark, it comes to 79 marks, which is in fact has been correctly  projected  in  Annexure-B  to  the  counter  affidavit.  Further, Annexure-3 to the writ petition does not bear any signature of any person, whereas Annexure-B to the counter affidavit, which is a correct document, contains signature of the Inspector of Catholic Schools,  Gumla,  Jharkhand,  and  others  also.  Thus,  Annexure-3  to the writ petition has been filed only to wrongly influence this Court. 5. Considering  the  fact  that  the  petitioners  are  ladies  and have not been appointed, I am not inclined to take any stern action against them but they are warned to be more cautious in future.

With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands dismissed.

Pending  interlocutory application  being  I.A. No.14720 of 2025, stands disposed of.