High CourtsDivision Bench(2024) 07 JH CK 0075

Sujata Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand and Others

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 9 July 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ananda Sen, J · Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
L.P.A. No.281 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 412 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The writ petitioner has filed this Letters Patent Appeal challenging the order dated 23.03.2022 passed in W.P. (S) No.778 of 2009. Grievance of the appellant is that respondent no.9 has been wrongly appointed as Para Teacher ignoring the set norms. In fact, he has challenged the appointment of respondent no.9 as the appellant claims that he should have been appointed as Para Teacher of Bandhangar, Deoghar on the ground that respondent no.2 has been convicted in a criminal case.

3.

Learned Single Judge, after hearing the counsel for the parties, by the impugned order, merely had directed the District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar cum District Programme Officer, Jharkhand Education Project, Deoghar to look into the entire matter with regard to the appointment of respondent no.9 and proceed in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of passing of the said order. It is further ordered that an opportunity of hearing should be given to respondent no.9 while deciding the issue in question.

4.

Thus, as per the impugned order, it is clear that the learned Single Judge has not passed any order against the appellant or against the respondent no.9 nor decided any issue. Learned Single Judge has only directed the District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar to look into the grievance of the appellant and pass an appropriate order as per the law.

5.

Aforesaid being the nature of direction given by the learned Single Judge, we are of the opinion that the appellant cannot be said to be aggrieved by the aforesaid order, when the issue and the claim of the rival parties is yet to be decided by the authority as directed by the learned Single Judge. The appellant has rushed to this Court challenging the aforesaid order which in our opinion cannot be said to be affecting the appellant.

6.

Thus, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. It has been submitted by the parties that the matter is yet to be decided by the District Superintendent of Education. We thus reiterate the direction given in Para-12 of the writ petition by the learned Single Judge. The District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar cum District Programme Officer, Jharkhand Education Project, Deoghar (respondent no.4) is directed to conclude the process within a period of two months from date of production/receipt of copy of this order, if not already disposed of.

This L.P.A., thus stands disposed.