Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 2158 of 2013 Ramesh Ram .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & others ..... Respondents with W.P.(S). No. 2188 of 2013 Om Prakash Pandey .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & others ..... Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pathak For the Respondents :J.C. to A.G. 02/06.08.2013 Heard counsel for the parties. In both the writ petitions grievance of the petitioners is that they have not been appointed to the post of police driver in the district of Palamau and Latehar respectively on the sole ground that they had made their application for two districts simultaneously under Advertisement No. 1/2010. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the said issue is no longer res-integra in view of the judgment rendered by this Court in W.P.S. No. 1658 of 2011 as also in W.P.S. No. 3594 of 2012. According to the counsel for the petitioners the said condition under Clause-4 of the advertisement has been quashed by this Court in the case of Mithilesh Tiwari, petitioner in W.P.S. No. 1658 of 2011. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have made representations before the respondent No. 3, The Superintendent of Police, Garhwa cum Chairman, Palamau Range Constable Police Selection Board, Palamau at Daltonganj for redressal of their aforesaid grievances relating to their claim for appointment to the post of police driver under advertisement no. 1/2010 in the respective districts of Palamau and Latehar as the same has not been finally redressed or decided. Learned counsel for the respondent- State submitted that if the petitioners prefer fresh representation before the respondent no. 3, the Superintendent of Police, Garhwa cum Chairman, Palamau Range Constable Police Selection Board, Palamau at Daltonganj, their case shall be considered in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a reasonable time. -2- Considering the aforesaid submissions of the parties, both the writ petitions are disposed of without commenting upon the merit of the claim of the petitioners by allowing them liberty to approach the respondent no.3, the Superintendent of Police, Garhwa cum Chairman, Palamau Range Constable Police Selection Board, Palamau at Daltonganj by way of individual representation together with all supporting facts and judgments, which they are seeking to rely. On receipt of such representation(s), Respondent no.3, the Superintendent of Police, Garhwa cum Chairman, Palamau Range Constable Police Selection Board, Palamau at Daltonganj shall consider the case of the individual petitioners in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and speaking order after proper verification of the claim of the petitioners within a period of 8 weeks, which shall also be communicated to the petitioners. Accordingly,both the writ petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. I.A. No. 4794 of 2013 preferred in W.P.S. No. 2158 of 2013 and I.A. No. 4796 of 2013 preferred in W.P.S. No. 2188 of 2013 also stand disposed of. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) A. Mohanty