2025:JHHC:30548 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 998 of 2025 ---- 1. Rajesh Kumar, aged about 41 years, son of Mahavir Baraik, resident of Koromiya, Japlanga, P.O. Koromiya, P.S.-Thethaitangar, District- Simdega, Jharkhand, Pin- 835201. 2. Sunil Kumar, aged about 41 years, son of Kishori Paswan, resident at village- Chiprakala, Garhwa, P.O.+P.S.- Garhwa, District- Garhwa, Pin- 822114, Jharkhand. 3. Rakesh Ranjan Choubey, aged about 31 years, son of Abhimanyu Choubey, resident at village Dewgana, P.O.- Dewgana, P.S.- Meral District- Garhwa, Pin- 822133, Jharkhand. 4. Ranjan Kumar Pandey, aged about 36 years, son of Mahendra Nath Pandey, resident at village Redma, P.O. G.L.A College, P.S.- Medninagar, District- Palamu, Pin- 822102, Jharkhand. 5. Krishna Kumar Choubey, aged about 33 years, son of Shri Diwakar Choubey, resident at village- Sulsulia, P.O.-Mahadeiya, P.S.- Nagar Untari, District- Garhwa, Pin- 822121, Jharkhand. 6. Vikash Kumar, aged about 40 years, son of Late Ram Krishna Ram, resident of Hira Mandir Road, P.O.+ P.S. Daltonganj. District- Palamu, Pin- 822101, Jharkhand. 7. Siya Ram Pandey, aged about 42 years, son of Shri Prem Sagar Pandey, resident of village- Pipra Kala, P.O.+ P.S.-Garhwa, District- Garhwa, Pin- 822114, Jharkhand.. … Petitioners -versus- 1. UNION OF INDIA Through the Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Research and Education Minister of Agriculture, Government of India New Delhi, P.O.P.S- Inderpuri, New Delhi, 110012. 2. The Director General I.C.A.R. (Indian Council of Agriculture Research), having Head Office New Delhi, Agricultural extension Division Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan 1, Puso, P.O.+P.S- Inderpuri, New Delhi, Pin-110012. 3. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary Jharkhand Ranchi at Department of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, Kanke, P.O. & P.S. Kanke, Ranchi, Pin- 834008. 4. The Vice Chancellor, Birsa Agricultural University Ranchi, P.O & P.S.- Kanke, District Ranchi - 834006. 5. The Director of Extension Education, Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi, P.O & P.S. Kanke, District Ranchi 834006 6. Director Administration, Birsa Agricultural University Ranchi, P.O & P.S. Kanke, District-Ranchi-834006 7. Director Administration, Birsa Agricultural University Ranchi, P.O & P.S. Kanke, District-Ranchi-834006 8. The Assistant Director Administration (Recruitment), Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi, P.O & P.S. Kanke, District Ranchi 834006. 9. The Comptroller, Birsa Agricultural University Ranchi, P.O & P.S.-Kanke, District Ranchi-834006 10. Programme Co-Ordinator, Krishi Vigyan Kendra, East Singhbhum (Darisal), P.O.& P.S. Bano, District- Simdega-835210.. … Respondents ---- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ---- For the Petitioner : Ms. Khalida Haya Rashmi, Advocate 2025:JHHC:30548 -: 2 :- For the Respondents: Mr. A. Alam, Sr. Advocate Ms. Sushmita Kumari, Advocate Mr. T.N. Mishra, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar Roy, AC to GA III ---- 04/ 16.09.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Petitioners, in this writ petition, has prayed for the following reliefs:- I. For issuance of appropriate writ/writs, Order/Orders, Direction/Directions or a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the advertisement given out by the Birsa Agricultural University, bearing Advertisement No. BAU (VC) 21/2022 dated 27.08.2022 through Memo no. F 10- 1552/2022/DEE/BAU/2157 (Anx-1) for Recruitment of Assistant Positions in Various KVKS, as the same is arbitrary and illegal and no selection process has been followed. II. For issuance of appropriate writ/writs, Order/Orders, Direction/Directions in nature of mandamus for the stay from the implementation of impugned selection list and restrain the respondents from making any appointment based on the same in the light of Sachin Kumar ν. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board, (2021) 4 SCC 631 as the irregularities are discernible and the same has been prepared in violation of the established selection process which clearly shows lack of transparency in the selection process and the failure to adhere to the due process of law. III. For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, Order/Orders, Direction/Directions or a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the application of petitioners for the post of Assistant since majority of the petitioners have been working with KVK for more than 10 years and whereas the petitioners possess all the requisite qualification/eligibility. IV. For the issuance of an appropriate Writ/Writs, Order/Orders, or Direction/Directions, or a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to align the petitioners' pay scale with the pay scale specified in the advertisement, as both fall within the same grade but have been assigned different pay scales. Such disparity violates the principle of equal pay for equal work, thereby warranting judicial intervention to ensure fairness and equity in employment conditions. V. For issuance an appropriate writ/order/Direction directing the respondents to produce the entire record and proceeding of the recruitment process as the error and lack of transparency are evident from the fact that the selection list has been prepared without the merit list and the interviews of the petitioners have been rejected without providing them any reasons/notice оr intimation regarding the same.; 3. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners were serving under the respondent authorities in different capacities. Thereafter, the petitioners having due qualifications and experience applied for the post of Assistant as per the advertisement No. BAU (VC) 21/2022 dated 27.08.2022 and were allotted admit cards for appearing in the examination. The eligibility 2025:JHHC:30548 -: 3 :- criteria for the post of Assistant as per the impugned advertisement was Bachelors Degree from a recognized university with the working knowledge of Computer applications along with two years of working experience. Most of the petitioners had been working for the respondents for more than 10 years and two of the writ petitioners had more than 4 years of experience in KVKs. Petitioners contend that despite having all the necessary education qualifications and requisite work experience, the application of petitioners got rejected without giving any justification or notice. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner puts forth his arguments stating that the pay scale for the post of Assistant has been increased to Rs. 9300- 34,800/- with a Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- as per the advertisement but the petitioner working in the said post received a salary in the range of Rs. 9000- 11000/- which violates the principle of ‘Equal Pay for Equal Work’. The counsel states that the respondent are adamant to appoint other candidates while excluding the petitioners who had the qualifications required and were discharging their duties diligently for over a decade. The counsel contends that there was no transparency in the selection process and the authorities failed to follow the due process of law. The counsel further submits that there were loopholes in the entire recruitment process as the reservation roaster was not followed for the screening and interview process, a fair panel of selection committee was not there. The appointment letters were issued to the candidates even before the publication of the final merit list. 5. Learned counsel representing the respondents submits that the petitioners did not qualify in the selection process as their position in the selection list was much low. The counsel submits that the advertisement was for vacant post of Assistant (sanctioned in each KVK on permanent basis by ICAR New Delhi) while the petitioners were not working against the vacant post of Assistant in different KVKs in order to claim for selection. The counsel also submits that the order of this Court to publish the final result of the recruitment process has been challenged in a Letters Patent Appeal and the same is pending. 6. After hearing the counsel for the parties and going through the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondent No.3, I find that for the same advertisement issued by Secretary Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Co-operative, Government of Jharkhand vide letter No.1176 dated 11.05.2023 prohibited the Vice-Chancellor, Birsa Agriculture University from publishing the final result and issuing appointment letters to the selected 2025:JHHC:30548 -: 4 :- candidates. The said letter dated 11.05.2023 was challenged in W.P.(S) No.4941 of 2023 which was quashed by the Writ Court with a direction to issue appointment letters to the successful candidates of the said advertisement. The order dated 10.09.2024 passed in the aforesaid writ was challenged in L.P.A. Filing No.14050 of 2024 and the same is pending. 7. As the issue involved in this writ petition also relates to the same advertisement for which Letters Patent Appeal is already pending, thus, I am of the view that the writ petition filed by the petitioners is pre mature. 8. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed, with a liberty to the petitioners to approach after disposal of the Letters Patent Appeal. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Ananda Sen, J.) Ranchi, dated 16th September, 2025 Kumar/Cp-02