2025:JHHC:25415 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 7512 of 2017 --------- Raisuddin @ Raisuddin Shekh son of Eliyas Ali @ Eliyas Shekh, resident of village Farsa, P.O. -Bhawanipur, P.S.- Pakur(M), District- Pakur, Jharkhand. ......Petitioner Versus 1. State of Jharkhand. 2. Regional Deputy Director of Education, Santhal Paragana Region, P.O. and P.S.-Dumka, District-Dumka. 3. District Superintendent of Education, Pakur, P.O. and P.S. - Pakur, District - Pakur. 4. Jharkhand Academic Council through its Chairman, P.O. and P.S.- Namkum, District - Ranchi. 5. Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council, P.O. and P.S.- Namkum. District - Ranchi. 6. President, Madrasa Ahmadiya Salfia Old Farsa, village-Farsa, P.O. -Bhawanipur, P.S. Pakur(M), District -Pakur, Jharkhand. 7. Secretary, Madrasa Ahmadiya Salfia Old Farsa, village-Farsa, P.O. -Bhawanipur, P.S. Pakur(M), District -Pakur, Jharkhand. 8. Head Moulvi, Madrasa Ahmadiya Salfia Old Farsa, village-Farsa, P.O. -Bhawanipur, P.S. Pakur(M), District -Pakur, Jharkhand. 9. Wasima Khatun, D/o Abul Kalam Azad (Head Moulvi Madrasa Ahmadiya Salfia Old Farsa), resident of village-Farsa, P.O. - Bhawanipur, P.S. Pakur(M), District-Pakur, Jharkhand. .....Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Saibal Mitra, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ashim Kr. Sahani, Advocate Ms. Risheeta Singh, A.C. to Mrs. Richa Sanchita, Advocate --------- 08/Dated:-26.08.2025 1. Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for the following reliefs: For issuance of appropriate Writ or Writs, direction or directions, order or orders to set aside the Letter dated 25-07-2017 issued by the Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi whereby and whereunder Secretary, JAC, Ranchi has given approval of the Appointment of the Respondent No. 9 Wasima Khatoon in the post of Assistant Teacher (Moulvi) without considering the fact that Respondent No. 9 is the daughter of Head Moulvi and niece of Secretary of the Madrasa in Question; 2025:JHHC:25415 2 Petitioner further prays for issuance of appropriate Writ or Writs direction or directions, order or orders commanding the Concern Respondents to initiate fresh Selection process for filling up the post of Moulvi in Madrasa Ahmadiya Salfia Old Farsa, village-Farsa, P.O. Bhawanipur, P.S. Pakur(M), District -Pakur, Jharkhand on which Respondent No. 9 has been illegally appointed by cancelling her appointment in the post. 3. 3. Looking to the averments made in para 6 to 12 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No.8 it transpires that pursuant to an advertisement, the petitioner applied for the post of moulvi and he appeared in the written examination as well as in the interview. However, the respondent no. 9, having more marks, in the written examination, as well as in the interview, had been selected. Having remained unsuccessful in the selection process, the petitioner has filed this writ application. From perusal of the writ petition, it transpires that the writ petitioner did not mention that respondent No. 8, being the head moulvi of the Madarsa, did participate in the selection process in any manner; or he pursuant to the advertisement participated in the interview held for selection for the post of moulvi; or he issued the appointment letter, and/nor he recommended the name of respondent No.9 for appointment in any manner. 4. In this way, it is crystal clear that the respondent No. 8, being head moulvi of the Madarsa did not participate in the entire selection process for appointment on the post of moulvi and therefore, all other allegations made in the writ petition to the effect that respondent no. 9, being daughter of the respondent no. 8, has been wrongly appointed, are not only misconceived but are 2025:JHHC:25415 3 frivolous in nature. 5. After going through the letter No. 2756 dated 15.07.2016, issued by the Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council (JAC), Ranchi it transpires that directions for filling up the vacant post of moulvi and matric teacher in the Madarsa were issued. In the said letter, the JAC laid down the rules and the guidelines for issuing advertisement and for completion of the selection process. In paragraph 2, under the head of steps to be taken after the publication of the advertisement, it has been categorically mentioned that for the purposes of interview, there must be minimum three persons in an interview board to be constituted by the managing committee and those members should be educated. It has also been clarified that no member, whose relative is a candidate, shall participate in the said interview board. 6. From bare perusal of the said letter, containing the guideline/rule issued by JAC, Ranchi, it is crystal clear that there is no bar for the relative of the head moulvi to apply for the post of moulvi as advertised; and the only restrictions imposed was that no persons should be involved in the entire selection process, if his/relatives are appearing. In this view of the matter, it is held that the respondent No. 9, being daughter of respondent no. 8, is not debarred in applying for the post of moulvi in terms of the advertisement issued by the managing committee. 2025:JHHC:25415 4 In this factual background, the allegations contained in the writ petition with regard to active participation of the respondent No. 8 in the selection process for the post of moulvi appears to be misconceived and incorrect. 7. With regard to the statements made in paragraph 8 with reference to the advertisement issued in 2016, it is categorically stated that as per the advertisement, the candidate applying for the post of moulvi must have the degree of moulvi (equivalent to intermediate) or fazil, recognized by JAC. Therefore, the candidate having the qualification of moulvi fulfills the criteria as per the advertisement and there was no bar for the respondent no. 9 from applying for the said post. 8. It further appears that the letter dated 23.11.2016 has wrongly been interpreted by the petitioner as the said letter was issued by the Secretary, JAC, Ranchi, to the Secretary of the Madarsa stating, inter alia therein, that since the head moulvi Abdul Kalam Azad, had participated in the selection process for the post of moulvi, as such, the same stood cancelled. Subsequently, another advertisement dated 25.12.2016 was published in Prabhat Khabar. This fact has been mentioned in paragraph 10 of the writ petition. It clearly transpires that the candidate having qualification of moulvi was also entitled to apply for the post of moulvi. It is also pointed out that higher qualification does not have separate point as the qualification does not carry any point to be considered for selection. 2025:JHHC:25415 5 In this view of the matter, the person having qualification of moulvi and a candidate having a qualification of fazil does not give any preferential right to the candidate. 9. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the discussions made hereinabove, admittedly; the appointment was done in the year 2017 and the person who has been appointed, is working there since then continuously and the same was duly approved by Jharkhand Academic Council after proper procedure. 10. Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the averments made in the respective affidavits, I do not find any error in the impugned order; as such, no relief can be granted to the petitioner at this stage. 11. As a result, the instant writ application stands dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, also stands closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) vikas/-