Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12171 (JHR)

AMAR NATH GAUTAM v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

WPC/2094/2025 · 2025-05-07

Deepak Roshan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:13739 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 2094 of 2025 ---------- Amar Nath Gautam, aged about 39 years, son of Shri Awadh Narayan, residing at Quarter No. DT 2255, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, Police Station Dhurwa, District Ranchi. ………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand; 2. The Secretary, Higher Education and Technical and Skill Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi officiating from Project Bhawan, Post Dhurwa, Police Station Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi; 3. The Director, (Technical Education), Higher Education and Technical and Skill Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi officiating from Project Bhawan, Post Dhurwa, Police Station Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi; 4. The Secretary, State Board of Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi officiating from Science and Technology Campus, Sirkha Toli, Namkum, Post Namkum, Police Station Namkum, District Ranchi; 5. The Secretary, Jharkhand Council Science and Technology, Ranchi officiating from Sector III, Post Dhurwa, Police Station Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioners : Ms. Ritu Kumar, Advocate Mr. S.B. Deo, Advocate Mr. Raj, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, Sr.SC-II -------- 02/ 07.05.2025 The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for direction upon the respondent-authorities to consider his case for regularization/ absorption to the post of Computer Operator giving him age relaxation and preference over others with all consequential benefits taking into consideration that he has been appointed to the post of Computer Operator pursuant to an open Advertisement dated 25.01.2007 and since then he has been working on daily wage basis. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant application may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to 2025:JHHC:13739 2 file fresh representation before the 3rd respondent and he may be directed to take a final decision in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not have any objection since no counter-affidavit has been filed. 4. Having regard to the limited submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the instant application is hereby disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to file fresh representation along with all supporting documents to be relied by him before the 3rd respondent within a period of 8 weeks. If any such representation is received by the 3rd respondent, he shall look into the matter and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations within a further period of 12 weeks. 5. If the order is passed in favour of the petitioner, necessary order of regularization/absorption be issued in his favour within a further period of 2 weeks. 6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) kunal/-