2025:JHHC:28099 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 7525 of 2012 --- 1. Vijay Ranjan S/o Upendra Mehra, resident of Bambam Baba Road, in front of Gulab Falahari, Ward No.24, Deoghar, P.O & P.S- Deoghar, Jharkhand, 2. Partha Sarathi Das S/o Ratnakar Das, resident of village- Dhadika, PO & PS -Kumrabad, District- Dumka. 3. Sanjay Kumar Das, S/o Sri Ganesh Das, resident of village-Goradih, PO- Rohini, PS- Jagdishpur District Deoghar ...Petitioners Versus 1. State of Jharkhand 2. Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Cane Development, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, PO & PS- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi. 3. Special Secretary-cum-Nodal Officer,Agriculture and Cane Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O & P.S- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi. 4. Dy. Commissioner, Santhal Pargana, Dumka, PO & PS & District-Dumka 5. Saroj Hembram,S/o Harun Hembram, resident Dumka, PO, PS Distirct-Dumka 6. Sanjeev Hembram, S/o Bhunda Hembrom, resident of Dumka, PO, PS & Distirct-Dumka 7. Sinan Marandi, Naiki Marandi, resident of PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 8. Junas Marandi, S/o Munu Marandi, resident of Dumka, PO, PS Distirct-Dumka 9. Ashok Kumar Hansda, S/o Bikram Hansda resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 10. Indradev Murmu, S/o Mahadev Murmu. resident of Dumka, PO, PS District-Dumka 11. Ashok Murmu, Rakshit Murmu, resident of Dumka,P.O. P.S. & District-Dumka 12. Praveen Kumar Hembrom, S/o Lobin Hemberom resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 13. Abhishek Tudu, S/o Shibdhan Tudu, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 14. Joy Arnest Marandi, S/o Chondo Marandi resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 2025:JHHC:28099 2 15. Selentius Murmu S/o Sushil Kumar Murmu, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 16. Augustin Tudu, S/o Chando Tudu, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 17. Aditya Abhishek S/o Jeetrai Soren resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 18. Deepankar Tudu, S/o Shivdhan Tudu, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 19. Ramesh Hembram S/o Chhoto Hembram resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 20. Veena Marandi, S/o Manu Marandi resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 21. Robin Hembrom ,S/o Churka Hembrom resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distinct-Dumka 22. Diwakar Hembrom,S/o Gomasta Hembram resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 23. Rakesh Kumar Murmu, S/0 Rameshwar Murmu resident of Dumka, PO, PS & Distirct-Dumka 24. Rajeev Kumar Soren, S/o Sushil Kumar Soren resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 25. Anand Kumar Singh, s/o Banarsi Prasad Singh, resident of Dumka, PO, PS & District Dumka 26. Jyoti Murmu, S/o Rasik Murmu, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 27. Prishila Kisku, S/o Sukhu Kisku resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 28. Rajesh Hembrom, S/o Parmeshwar Hembrom, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 29. Anil Murmu, S/o Shyam Lal Murmu, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirct-Dumka 30. Ashish Kumar Soren, S/o Bisha Soren, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirict-Dumka 31. Chandranath Hembrom, s/o Shivlal Hembrom, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distirot-Dumka. 32. Sushil Soren, s/o not known to the petitioner, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &District-Dumka 33.Arun Kumar Soren, S/0 Benjamin Bagal Soren, resident of Dumka, PO, PS &Distinct-Dumka 34. Pramod Kumar Soren, s/o Sri Girish Murmu, resident of Dumka, PO, PS Distirct-Dumka. ...... Respondents -- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- 2025:JHHC:28099 3 For the Petitioner(s): M/s. Manoj Tandon, Karamjit S.Chhabra, Akanksha Priya, Advocates For the Resp.-State : Mr. Kishore Kumar Singh, S.C.-V -- 10/04.09.2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the Petitioners for quashing the notification as contained in Annexure-3 published in the Newspaper by the concerned Respondent, whereby the selections have been made in favour of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe candidates in utter violation of the Advertisement against the post which were advertised. 3. Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel for the Petitioners draws attention of this Court towards the Advertisement (Annexure-1) and straightaway he pointed out Sr. No. 19, which is with respect to Dumka District, wherein the total posts available for the appointment of Jansevak for Scheduled Caste was 34 and for Scheduled Tribe was only 4 seats and for Unreserved Seats it was 38; however, the concerned Respondent has just reversed the reserved category numbers by appointing 34 seats for Scheduled Tribe and 4 seats from Scheduled Caste. He further submits that there is no corrigendum; as such, as per settled legal principles that the rule of game cannot be changed in midway and since as per Advertisement there was specific number of Unreserved and Reserved Seats; as such, the respondents were not entitled to just reverse the number of reserved seats between Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste. 2025:JHHC:28099 4 4. After going through the counter affidavit filed by the Respondents, it is an admitted fact that corrigendum has not been issued. There is an averment on behalf of deponent that the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district has repeatedly requested the State Government for issuance of corrigendum but the fact remains that no corrigendum has been issued. 5. Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case which are not in dispute, the instant writ application deserves to be allowed. However, the case has become victim of delay. The case was filed on 18.12.2012 and now we are in the end of 2025. However, this Court does not hesitate to observe that though the writ petition deserves to be allowed, but no direction can be given to the Respondents to revise the select list of appointed candidates who have already been appointed long before and issue a fresh select list. 6. However, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case for directing the Respondents to give compensation to the Petitioners. 7. As a matter of fact, from the averments made in paragraph-12 and Annexure-2 to the writ application, it becomes evident that if the correct selection of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe candidate would have been considered as per the Advertisement; these Petitioners could have been appointed but as stated hereinabove; now, they cannot be appointed and it is an admitted case that no 2025:JHHC:28099 5 corrigendum was issued. Accordingly, interest of justice would be sufficed by giving some compensation to these Petitioners. Accordingly, a sum of Rs. 02 Lakhs should be paid to each of these Petitioners as compensation by the Respondent-State of Jharkhand. The payment shall be made within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. 8. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Deepak Roshan, J.) jk