SHAHEEN PERWEEN vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND, THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY,

2026:JHHC:30955
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI


W.P.(S) No. 5869 of 2024
….…..

1. Vinod Kumar Singh, aged about 40 years, Son of
Ramsajeewan Singh, Village-205, Sirawal Beri, Beri Tappa
Daya, P.O.- Koraon, P.S.- Koraon, District-Allahabad, Uttar
Pradesh, PIN-212306.
2. Gaurav Mishra, aged about 30 years, Son of Mahendra
Mishra, Resident of Village-Sikatahaniya, P.O.-Guladiya
Bhoop Singh, P.S.- Sikrahan, District-Sahajahanpur, Uttar
Pradesh, PIN-242042.
3. Lalata Prasad, aged about 44 years, Son of Jokhan Ram,
Village-Devghat, P.O.-Koraon, P.S.-Koraon, District-
Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, PIN-212306.
4. Binod Sen Gupta, aged about 44 years, Son of Nagad
Narayan Gupta, Resident of Village-Tamar, P.O.-Tamar,
P.S.-Tamar, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. ..… Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Secretary, School Education & Literacy Department,
Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O., P.S.
Dhurwa & District-Ranchi.
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Directorate of
Secondary Education, School Education & Literacy
Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan,
P.O., P.S. Dhurwa & District-Ranchi.
4. The Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through its
Secretary, having its office at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, P.O.,
P.S. Namkum & District-Ranchi.
5. The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission,
having its office at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, P.O., P.S.
Namkum & District-Ranchi.
6. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission, having its office at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan,
P.O., P.S. Namkum & District-Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s)
With
W.P.(S) No. 4240 of 2023
….…..
1. Uttam Kumar Mahto, aged about 34 years, S/o Indra
Nath Mahto, R/o Village Marhul Sudi, P.O. Pirgul, P.S.
Kasmar, District - Bokaro.
2. Bimla Kumari, aged about 38 years, D/o Neman
Prajapati, R/o Village Kutumsukri Ichak, P.O., P.S. Ichak &
District - Hazaribagh.
3. Ramsanjiwan Prasad Yadav, aged about 39 years, S/o
Late Bundi Mahto, R/o Village Koni, P.O. Malda P.S. Ganwa
& District – Giridih.
4. Bijay Kumar Singh, aged about 39 years, S/o Ganesh
1

2026:JHHC:30955
Singh, R/o Village Jamadih, P.O. Kushmi, P.S. Mahagama
& District - Godda.
5. Tarakant Jha, aged about 39 years, S/o Sarju Narayan
Jha, R/o Village Alkusha, P.O. Ojihadin, P.S. Sarath &
District - Deoghar.
6. Rajiv Kumar, aged about 49 years, S/o Rajendra Pd. Sah,
R/o Village Lakhikundi, P.O. Asansol, P.S. Dumka Muffasil
& District - Dumka.
7. Neerja Kumari, aged about 46 years, D/o Ripusudan
Mishra, R/o A/57, Karmik Nagar, P.O. ISM, P.S. Saraidhela
& District - Dhanbad.
8. Prerna Kumari, aged about 42 years, W/o Uma Shankar
Kumvkar, R/o Bhawanipur Site Sangiori, P.O. Jodhadih
More Chas, P.S. Chas & District - Bokaro.
9. Vivek Kumar Maurya, aged about 36 years, S/o
Ramshabd Maurya, Resident of Village Janeshwari Bujurg,
P.O., P.S. Rajesultan Pur, District - Ambedkar Nagar (Uttar
Pradesh) & PIN - 224176.
10. Bandana Gorain, aged about 29 years, D/o Bharat Ch.
Gorain, R/o Village Nawadih, P.O. Adrakuri P.S.
Chandankiyari & District - Bokaro.
11. Narottam Trivedi, aged about 35 years, S/o Shriram
Trivedi, R/o Village Koora, P.O. Ailai, P.S. Khaga & District -
Fatepur (Uttar Pradesh) & PIN - 212655.
12. Dhan Raj Yadav, aged about 36 years, S/o Ram Sumer
Yadav, Resident of Village-Teliyadeeh, P.O. Rasoolpur-
Tareta, P.S. Walterganj, District-Basti- 272002, Uttar
Pradesh.
13. Deepika Rajput, aged about 34 years, W/o Rajeev
Ranjan, R/o Village Pindrabad, P.O. Balgo, P.S. Jamua &
District - Giridih.
14. Nitish Kumar, aged about 30 years, S/o Mattolal Yadav,
R/o Sujankitta, P.O. Chanda, P.S. Thakurgangti & District -
Godda.
15. Somenath Ghosh, aged about 37 years, S/o Bijoy
Chandra Ghosh, R/o Village Raghunathpur, P.O. Nayada,
P.S. Indpur, District – Bankura (West Bengal) & PIN -
722121.
16. Tara Chandra Sahu, aged about 44 years, S/o Ramji
Sahu, R/o Village Noorpur Hazripur, P.O. Noorpur
Hazripur, P.S. Pipari, District –Kaushambi (Uttar Pradesh)
& PIN -212218.
17. Ranjan Kumar Pandey, aged about 31 years, S/o
Bhikhan Pandey, Resident of Village Pagar, P.O. Chatti
Bariyatu, P.S. Keredari & District - Hazaribagh.
18. Radheshyam Prajapati, aged about 37 years, S/o
Santram Prajapati, Resident of Village Pakariyapur, P.O.
2

2026:JHHC:30955
Amari, P.S. Atrauliya, District- Azamgarh (Uttar Pradesh) &
PIN - 276142.
19. Pramod Kumar, aged about 34 years, S/o Bechan
Singh, R/o Village Majhagawan, P.O. Shamsherpur, P.S.
Chakarg hatta, District – Chandauli (Uttar Pradesh) & PIN -
232111.
20. Puspendu Dash, aged about 34 years, S/o Aswini
Kumar Dash, R/o Mahishadal Girl’s College, Village
Rangibasan, P.O., P.S. Mahishadal, District - Purba
Medinipur (West Bengal) & PIN - 721628.
21. Sandip Samanta, aged about 31 years, S/o Nepal
Samanta, R/o Village Anandapur, P.O., P.S. Anandapur,
District - Paschim Medinipur (West Bengal) & PIN - 721122.
..… Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Secretary, School, Education & Literacy Department,
Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O., P.S.
Dhurwa & District – Ranchi.
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Directorate of
Secondary Education, School, Education & Literacy
Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan,
P.O., P.S. Dhurwa & District – Ranchi.
4. The Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through its
Secretary, having its office at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, P.O.,
P.S. Namkum & District – Ranchi.
5. The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission,
having its office at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, P.O., P.S.
Namkum & District – Ranchi.
6. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission, having its office at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan,
P.O., P.S. Namkum & District – Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s)
With
W.P.(S) No. 2573 of 2024
….…..

1. Sarita Kumari, aged about 42 years, Wife of Shailendra
Tiwari, Resident of village – Duldulwa, P.O. – Peska, P.S. –
Meral, District – Garhwa, Jharkhand – 822114.
2. Prashant Ghoshal, aged about 36 years, Son of Pradeep
Kumar Ghoshal, Resident of village – Yogidih, P.O. –
Yogidih, P.S. – Chandankiyari, District – Bokaro,
Jharkhand – 828303. ..… Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary,
Government of Jharkhand, having office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, District –
Ranchi.
2. Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy,
3

2026:JHHC:30955
Govt. of Jharkhand, having office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, District –
Ranchi.
3. Jharkhand Staff Selection Committee through its
Secretary, having its office from Kalinagar, Chai Bagan, P.O.
and P.S. – Namkum, District – Ranchi.
4. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Committee, having its office from Kalinagar, Chai Bagan,
P.O. and P.S. – Namkum, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand.
5. Mohit Kumar Mahto, working on the post of Trained
Graduate Teacher at RGRG + 2 HS Karmatar, through the
District Education Officer, having office at Collectorate
Building, Jamtara, P.O. & P.S. – Jamtara, District –
Jamtara, Jharkhand.
6. Ramanand Pandey, working on the post of Trained
Graduate Teacher at JBC + 2 School Jamtara, through the
District Education Officer, having office at Collectorate
Building, Jamtara, P.O. & P.S. – Jamtara, District –
Jamtara, Jharkhand.
7. Tapan Kumar, working on the post of Trained Graduate
Teacher at RKHS Geria, through the District Education
Officer, having office at Collectorate Building, Jamtara, P.O.
& P.S. – Jamtara, District – Jamtara, Jharkhand.
8. Uma Kumari, working on the post of Trained Graduate
Teacher at RK + 2 HS Fatehpur, through the District
Education Officer, having office at Collectorate Building,
Jamtara, P.O. & P.S. – Jamtara, District – Jamtara,
Jharkhand. ..... Respondent(s)
With
W.P.(S) No. 2581 of 2024
….…..
1. Md. Nooruddin Ansari, aged about 40 years, Son of
Mahmudddin Ansari, Resident of village - Chepa Khurd,
P.O. - Chepa Kalan, P.S. - Barkagaon, District - Hazaribag,
Jharkhand – 825311.
2. Aziza Bano, aged about 32 years, daughter of Shoukat
Ali, Resident of village – Mandai Kalan, P.O. – Reformatry
School, P.S. – Sadar Hazaribag, District – Hazaribag,
Jharkhand – 825319.
3. Md. Maksud Alam, aged about 34 years, Son of Fazal
Hussain, Resident of village – Kushmay, P.O. – Kubri, P.S. –
Dhanwar, District – Giridih, Jharkhand – 825418.
4. Md. Shahid Ali, aged about 37 years, Son of Abdul
Khalik, Resident of village – Quazimagha, P.O – Jamua, P.S.
– Jamua, District – Giridih, Jharkhand – 815318.
5. Md. Khurshid Alam, aged about 36 years, Son of Abdul
Majeed, Resident of village – Paharpur, P.O. + P.S. –
Narayanpur, District – Jamtara, Jharkhand – 815352.
4

2026:JHHC:30955

6. Wasif Ansari, aged about 31 years, Son of Md. Latif,
Resident of village – Dhanwar, P.O. – Barsot, P.S. – Barhi,
District – Hazaribag, Jharkhand – 825405.
7. Rabbana Bano, aged about 32 years, Wife of Md. Riyaz
Ansari, Resident of village – Bhandradih, P.O. – Chaitadih,
P.S. – Giridih, District – Giridih, Jharkhand – 815301.
8. Md. Akhter Hussain, aged about 33 years, Son of Md.
Ibrar, Resident of village – Rajoun, P.O. – Madhura, P.S. –
Balbadda, District – Godda, Jharkhand – 814165.
..… Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary,
Government of Jharkhand, having office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, District –
Ranchi.
2. Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy,
Govt. of Jharkhand, having office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, District –
Ranchi.
3. Jharkhand Staff Selection Committee through its
Secretary, having its office from Kalinagar, Chai Bagan, P.O.
and P.S. – Namkum, District – Ranchi.
4. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Committee, having its office from Kalinagar, Chai Bagan,
P.O. and P.S. – Namkum, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand.
5. Mohammad Safdar, Son of Mohammad Jamil Ahmad,
presently working on the post of Trained Graduate Teacher
at District – Chatra through District Education Officer,
Chatra, having office at Collectorate Building, Chatra, P.O.
& P.S. – Chatra, District – Chatra, Jharkhand.
6. Md. Nasar Equbal, Son of Md. Ziaur Rahman, presently
working on the post of Trained Graduate Teacher at District
– Chatra through District Education Officer, Chatra, having
office at Collectorate Building, Chatra, P.O. & P.S. – Chatra,
District – Chatra, Jharkhand.
7. Md. Nesar Ahmad, Son of Abdul Samad, presently
working on the post of Trained Graduate Teacher at District
– Chatra through District Education Officer, Chatra, having
office at Collectorate Building, Chatra, P.O. & P.S. – Chatra,
District – Chatra, Jharkhand.
8. Mohammad Safdar Rabbani, Son of Mohammad Jamil
Ahmad, presently working on the post of Trained Graduate
Teacher at District – Chatra through District Education
Officer, Chatra, having office at Collectorate Building,
Chatra, P.O. & P.S. – Chatra, District – Chatra, Jharkhand.
9. Md Nesar Ahmad Hefizi, presently working on the post of
Trained Graduate Teacher at District – Chatra through
5

2026:JHHC:30955
District Education Officer, Chatra, having office at
Collectorate Building, Chatra, P.O. & P.S. – Chatra, District
– Chatra, Jharkhand. ..... Respondent(s)
With
W.P.(S) No. 2926 of 2023
….…..
1. Mohammad Aatif, aged about 30 years, Son of Md. Rafi,
resident of 20, Jhakahiya, P.O. & P.S. Jhakahi, District-
Siddhorth Nagar (Uttar Pradesh)-272192
2. Mohammad Rizwan Anwar, aged about 34 years, son of
Mohammad Rafique Islam, resident of village Lakshipur,
Chopra Uttar Dinajpur, P.O. & P.S. Lakshipur, District-
Dinajpur, West Bengal 766207
3. Mohammad Irshad Alam, aged about 32 years, Son of
Mohammad Israil Ansari, resident of village-Mokamo, P.O.
Koiridih, P.S.-Suriya, District-Giridih, Jharkhand-825320.
4. BadreAlam, aged about 37 years, son of Nizamuddin,
resident of Near Old Masjid, P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, District
Dhanbad (Jharkhand)
5. Shabbir Raza, aged about years, son of Ramjan Ansari,
resident of village-Marang Marcha at Ansar Chowk, P.O.-
Sandi Chitarpur, P.S. Rajrappa, District-Ramgarh
(Jharkhand) 829150 ..… Petitioner (s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through Principal Secretary,
Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, PO
& PS-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi-834004.
2. The Secretary Personnel, Administrative Reforms &
Rajbhasa Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Project
Bhawan, Dhurwa, PO & PS-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi-
834004
3. The Secretary, School Education & Literacy Department,
Govt. of Jharkhand, Telephone Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi,
PO & PS-Dhurwa, District Ranchi-834004
4. The Director Secondary Education, School Education &
Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi,
Telephone Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi, PO & PS-Dhurwa,
District Ranchi-834004
5. The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission
(JSSC), Ranchi, Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, Namkom, PO & PS
Namkom, District-Ranchi
6. The Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission
(JSSC), Ranchi, Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, Namkom, PO & PS
Namkom, District-Ranchi
7. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission (JSSC), Ranchi, Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan,
Namkom, PO & PS Namkom, District-Ranchi
..... Respondent(s)
6

2026:JHHC:30955
With
W.P.(S) No. 3974 of 2024
….…..
1. Pappu Kumar Pandey, aged about 32 years, Son of
Suresh Kumar Pandey, resident of village Ratanpur, P.O.
Ratanpur, P.S. Ichak, District Hazaribag, Jharkhand.
2. Deepak Kumar Sharma, aged about 33 years, Son of
Panchanan Sharma, resident of village Partand, P.O.
Alkusha, P.S. Siyaljori, District Bokaro, Jharkhand.
..… Petitioner (s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy
Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Telephone Building,
Dhurwa, Ranchi-04, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
3. The Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission
(JSSC), Ranchi, Kalinagar, Chaibagan, Namkom, P.O. &
P.S. Namkom, District Ranchi, Jharkhand.
4. The Director, Secondary Education, School Education
and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Telephone
Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi-4, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District
Ranchi.
5. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission (JSSC), Ranchi, Kalinagar, Chaibagan,
Namkom, P.O. & P.S. Namkom, District Ranchi,
Jharkhand. ..... Respondent(s)
With
W.P.(S) No. 6048 of 2024
….…..

Basudeo Mahto, aged about 50 years, Son of Doman Mahto,
Resident of Village – Chhotki Punnu, P.O. – Barki Punnu,
P.S. – Mahuwatand, District – Bokaro, Jharkhand –
8291112. ..… Petitioner (s)
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary,
Government of Jharkhand, having office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, District –
Ranchi.
2. Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy,
Govt. of Jharkhand, having office at Project Building,
Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S. – Jagarnathpur, District –
Ranchi.
3. Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through its
Secretary, having its office from Kalinagar, Chai Bagan, P.O.
and P.S. – Namkum, District – Ranchi.
4. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission, having its office from Kalinagar, Chai Bagan,
P.O. and P.S. – Namkum, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand.
..... Respondent(s)
7

2026:JHHC:30955
With
W.P.(S) No. 6482 of 2024
….…..
Pankaj Kumar Pandey, aged about 42 years, Son of Ranglal
Pandey, Resident of Village Kandra, P.O. – Kura, P.S. –
Pindrajora, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. ..… Petitioner (s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Secretary, School Education and Literacy
Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Telephone Building,
Dhurwa, Ranchi-04, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.
3. The Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission
(JSSC), Ranchi, Kalinagar, Chaibagan, Namkom, P.O. &
P.S. Namkom, District Ranchi, Jharkhand.
4. The Director, Secondary Education, School Education
and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Telephone
Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi-4, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District
Ranchi.
5. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission (JSSC), Ranchi, Kalinagar, Chaibagan,
Namkom, P.O. & P.S. Namkom, District Ranchi,
Jharkhand. ..... Respondent(s)
With
W.P.(S) No. 481 of 2025
….…..

Shaheen Perween, Wife of Asif Iqbal, Resident of Lakhe, P.O.
+ P.S. – District Hazaribagh. ..… Petitioner (s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand, through Chief Secretary,
Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project
Building, Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur,
District – Ranchi.
2. Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Training
and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, having its office
at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S.
Jagannathpur, District – Ranchi.
3. Principal Secretary, Department of School Education and
Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at
Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. – Dhurwa, P.S.
Jagannathpur, District – Ranchi.
4. Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission,
Ranchi, having its office at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan,
Namkum, P.O. and P.S. Namkum, District – Ranchi.
5. Controller of Examination, Jharkhand Staff Selection
Commission, Ranchi, having its office at Kali Nagar, Chai
Bagan, Namkum, P.O. and P.S. Namkum, District – Ranchi.
..... Respondent(s)
….…..


8

2026:JHHC:30955
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
….…

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Adv
Ms. Aprajita Bhardwaj, Adv
Mr. Akash Ajit Kumar, Adv
Ms. Tanya Singh, Adv
Mrs. Satakchhi Priya Verma, Adv
Mr. Chanchal Jain, Adv
Mr. Amritansh Vats, Adv
Mr. Kumar Abhishek, Adv
Mr. Ashish Choudhary, Adv
Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Adv
Mr. Suraj Prakash, Adv
Md. Zaid Ahmad, Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. Suresh Kumar, S.C.(L&C)-II
Mr. Ashish Kr., Shekhar, A.C. to S.C.
(L&C)-II
Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, A.C. to S.C.(L&C)-II
M/s. Sanjoy Piprawall, Prince Kumar, Jay
Prakash, Advocates
Mr. Aman Shekhar, A.C. to G.A.-I
Mr. Shubham Mishra, A.C. to S.C.(M)-II
Mr. Ayush Deb, A.C. to G.P.-VI
Mr. Kumar Pawan, A.C. to S.C. (M)-III
Mr. Arun Kr., Dubey, A.C. to G.P.-IV
….…
C.A.V. ON: 25/08/2026 PRONOUNCED ON:14/10/2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in
all these cases, the same were heard together with consent of
the learned counsel for the parties, and the same are decided by
this common judgment.
3. For the purpose of convenience, the facts of W.P.(s) No.
4240 of 2023 are taken into consideration to decide the lis.
4. The brief facts pertaining to the present case is that the
Jharkhand Government High School Teaching and Non-Teaching
Staff Appointment and Service Condition Rules, 2015 were
9

2026:JHHC:30955
framed under Article 309 of the Constitution, wherein Rule
9(I)(i) prescribed the educational qualification for appointment
to the post of Graduate Trained Teacher; one of the
qualifications prescribed was Post Graduation.
5. Pursuant thereto, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission
(JSSC) issued Advertisement No. 21/2016 dated 28.12.2016 for
appointment against 17,786 posts of Graduate Trained
Teachers for different subjects including the subject of
Sanskrit. Thereafter, there being difference and ambiguities
prescribed in the educational qualifications for appointment to
the post of Sanskrit, Urdu, Farsi, Arabic teachers, the JSSC
vide letter dated 10.01.2017 proposed to the State Government
for amendments and the State Government in exercise of power
under Rule 16 of the Rules of 2015, vide letter number 58
dated 11.01.2017 and the departmental secretary vide letter no.
30 dated 13.01.2017 accepted the proposals made by the JSSC
and approved the draft of the advertisement while making a
request for issuance of amended advertisement.
6. Pursuant to such actions and decisions taken by the State
Government, the JSSC issued another advertisement with
amended educational qualifications for appointment on the post
of Sanskrit, Urdu, Farsi and Arabic teachers. The amended
advertisement has been annexed as Annexure-4 to writ petition
which clearly shows that under the amended criteria, one of the
10

2026:JHHC:30955
qualifications for appointment as Graduate Trained Teacher in
Sanskrit was prescribed as Graduation degree from a
recognized university with minimum 45 % marks and B.Ed.

7. The petitioners accordingly participated in the selection
process; however, their candidature has been rejected vide
communication dated 21.06.2023 (Annexure-13 Series) for
want of Post-Graduation in Sanskrit/Acharya on the last date
of application, which is contrary to the qualification as clarified
and adopted by the State Government and as prescribed in the
subsequent amended advertisement.

8. Mr. Ajit Kumar, Ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the
petitioners submitted that the Jharkhand Government High
School Teaching and Non-Teaching Staff Appointment and
Service Condition Rules, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the
Rules of 2015) were framed under Article 309 of the
Constitution, wherein Rule 9 (I)(i) prescribed the educational
qualification for appointment to the post of Graduate Trained
Teacher. In the said rules, originally, in respect to the post of
Sanskrit, the qualification of Acharya (Sahitya or Vyakaran)
granted by a University/Institution recognized by the State
Government or the Central Government or Post Graduation
degree was prescribed.
9. Ld. Sr. Counsel has also drawn attention towards Rule 16
of the Rules of 2015 which specifically empowers the State
11

2026:JHHC:30955
Government that in case any difficulty arises in giving effect to
the provisions of the Rules, to take such action or pass such
order as may be considered necessary for removal of such
difficulty. The Rule further provides that any such action taken
or order passed by the State Government shall be deemed to
form part of the Rules itself.
10. Ld. Sr. Counsel has relied upon Letter No. 58 dated
11.01.2017 (Annexure-3 Series at Page 83) and Letter No. 30
dated 13.01.2017 (Annexure-3 Series at Page 85) which also
refers to the Government Letter No. 25 dated 11.01.2017 to
argue that subsequent to the original advertisement at
Annexure-2, the JSSC had made a proposal to modify the
educational qualification for the post of Sanskrit, Urdu, Arabic
and Farsi teachers; which the State had accepted and in
exercise of power under Rule 16 of the Rules, 2015, clarified the
educational qualification for Sanskrit and aforesaid other
subjects and recognized Graduation in the concerned subject
with the prescribed minimum marks as an eligibility
qualification.
11. It has been submitted that the said clarification formed
part of the Rules and was required to govern the selection
process.
12. He further submitted that in furtherance of the
aforementioned communications and decisions of the State
12

2026:JHHC:30955
Government dated 11.01.2017 & 13.01.2017, the respondent
JSSC published an amended Advertisement with the same
number wherein one of the education qualifications for
appointment to the post of Graduate Trained Teacher in the
subject of Sanskrit was Graduation Degree with 45% marks in
the subject of Sanskrit with B.Ed.
13. Ld. Sr. Counsel further draws the attention of this Court
towards the fact that all the petitioners possess Graduation
degree in Sanskrit with minimum 45% marks, which shall be
evident from Annexure-5 (Series) at Page 102. It has been
argued that the petitioners participated in the recruitment
process and they even qualified in the examination and were
called for document verification; however, their candidature
was rejected vide notice dated 21.06.2023 (Annexure-13 Series
at Page 159) on the ground that they did not possess the Post
Graduation Degree or have submitted the degree which has
been issued after 25.04.2017 i.e. the last date of filing up of the
application form.
14. It has been further submitted that the rejection of the
candidature of the petitioners is wholly arbitrary and contrary
to the very terms and conditions prescribed by the respondents
themselves. It was the State Government itself, who in exercise
of its statutory power under Rule 16 of the Rules of 2015, vide
Letter No. 58 dated 11.01.2017 and Letter No. 30 dated
13

2026:JHHC:30955
13.01.2017 consciously clarified/modified the educational
qualification for the post of Graduate Trained Teacher in
Sanskrit and recognized Graduation Degree in Sanskrit with
the prescribed minimum marks as one of the eligible
qualifications.
The said qualification was thereafter specifically
incorporated by JSSC in the Amended Advertisement No.
21/2016, pursuant to which the petitioners, who admittedly
possess Graduation Degree in Sanskrit with the requisite
marks, applied, participated in the examination, qualified and
were called for document verification.
15. It has been further submitted that having themselves
prescribed and incorporated “Graduation in Sanskrit as an
eligible qualification” , the respondents cannot subsequently
turn around and reject the candidature of the petitioners on the
ground that they did not possess “Post-Graduation in
Sanskrit/Acharya as on the last date of submission of
application” . Such a ground would amount to imposing an
additional eligibility condition after completion of substantial
stages of the recruitment process and would render the specific
amendment/clarification issued by the State Government
under Rule 16 wholly meaningless. The respondents are bound
by the eligibility conditions contained in their own amended
advertisement and cannot be permitted to approbate and
14

2026:JHHC:30955
reprobate by accepting Graduation in Sanskrit for permitting
participation in the selection process, while insisting upon Post-
Graduation/Acharya at the stage of final appointment.
The impugned rejection is, therefore, ex facie arbitrary,
discriminatory and contrary to the Rules of 2015 as
modified/clarified by the State Government. It has also been
argued that as per Rule 7 of the Rules of 2015 the cadre was
declared to be “Graduate Trained Teachers” and for all the
subject teachers except Sanskrit etc. minimum educational
qualification was prescribed as “Graduation”, thus apparently
there was ambiguity and due exercise was undertaken by the
Respondent JSSC as well as the State Government for removal
of the difficulties and for which also power has been given in
Rule 16 of the Rules of 2015 as such the Respondents cannot
be allowed to turn their faces after having exercised the
authority and jurisdiction under Rule 16 particularly when the
entire selection process was undertaken on the basis of the
amended advertisement with amended educational
qualifications for the post of Sanskrit teachers.
16. Mr. Kumar also pointed out that the other grounds
taken by the Respondents in the impugned notice dated
21.06.2023 is also non-est as it is not a case of any between the
Rules and advertisement; moreover, the Respondents cannot be
allowed to take advantage of their own wrong to the serious
15

2026:JHHC:30955
detriment and prejudice to the petitioners who may lose a
golden chance of being appointed on a government job which is
otherwise also a graduate trained teachers cadre.

17. Ld. Counsel appearing for the State and JSSC
submits that the candidature of the petitioners has been rightly
rejected, inasmuch as, the statutory Rules of 2015 did not
prescribe Graduation in Sanskrit as an eligible qualification for
appointment to the post of Graduate Trained Teacher in
Sanskrit. It is contended that the qualification mentioned in the
prospectus/advertisement, insofar as it permitted Graduation
in Sanskrit, was at variance with the qualification prescribed
under the statutory Rules, and the terms of an advertisement
cannot override or amend the Rules framed under Article 309 of
the Constitution. Accordingly, in the absence of the requisite
Post-Graduation/Acharya qualification as prescribed under the
Rules, the petitioners were not eligible for appointment and
their candidature has therefore been validly rejected.

18. Having heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and upon
perusal of the materials available on record, this Court finds
that the controversy lies in a narrow compass. Though the
Rules of 2015 originally prescribed Post-Graduation/Acharya
as one of the qualifications for Sanskrit/ Urdu, Farsi and
Arabic; Rule 16 of the Rules itself conferred power upon the
State Government to remove any difficulty arising in
16

2026:JHHC:30955
implementation of the Rules and further provides that any
action taken or order passed in exercise of such power, shall be
deemed to form part of the Rules.

19. It is in exercise of the aforesaid power that, vide
Letter No. 58 dated 11.01.2017 followed by Letter No. 30 dated
13.01.2017, the qualification for Sanskrit/Urdu/Farsi and
Arabic was clarified and Graduation in the concerned subject
with the prescribed minimum marks was expressly recognized
as an eligible qualification.
The said clarification was thereafter given effect to by
JSSC by incorporating the same in the amended Advertisement
No. 21/2016.
Thus, the contention of the respondents that
Graduation in Sanskrit/Urdu/Farsi and Arabic was merely a
qualification contained in the advertisement contrary to the
statutory Rules cannot be accepted.
20. The inclusion of Graduation was not an independent act of
JSSC dehors the Rules; rather, it emanated from the decision of
the State Government itself taken in exercise of power under
Rule 16, which, by the express language of the Rule, became
part of the statutory framework. Once the State itself
consciously modified/clarified the eligibility condition and
caused the same to be incorporated in the amended
advertisement; it cannot subsequently ignore its own decision
17

2026:JHHC:30955
and insist upon Post-Graduation/Acharya as the sole qualifying
condition.
21. This Court further finds that the petitioners
admittedly possessed Graduation degrees in
Sanskrit/Urdu/Farsi and Arabic and as prayed in respective
writ applications with the requisite marks, applied pursuant to
the amended advertisement, participated in the examination,
qualified and were thereafter called for document verification.
Their candidature could not, therefore, have been
rejected at the final stage on the ground that they did not
possess Post-Graduation/Acharya/Urdu/Farsi and Arabic as
on 25.04.2017, since such rejection/non consideration is
directly contrary to the eligibility criteria prescribed by the
respondents themselves under Rule 16 and incorporated in the
amended advertisement.
22. Permitting the respondents to do so would amount to
changing the eligibility criteria after the selection process had
been undertaken and would render the clarification dated
11.01.2017 and 13.01.2017 wholly otiose. Hence the
candidature of the petitioners should have been considered for
appointment.
23. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that
the impugned notice dated 21.06.2023 and the consequential
communications dated 28.06.2023, 01.07.2023 (in W.P.(S) No.
18

2026:JHHC:30955
4240 of 2023), notice dated 21.06.2023, (in W.P.(S) No. 5869 of
2024), Para 5(3) of notice dated 08.12.2023 (in W.P.(S) No. 6048
of 2024) and part of the notice dated 21.06.2023 (in W.P.(S) No.
3974 of 2024) insofar as they reject the candidature of the
petitioners merely for want of Post-Graduation in
Sanskrit/Acharya/Urdu/Farsi and Arabic, cannot be sustained
in law and are, hereby, quashed and set aside.
24. Consequently, all these writ petitions are allowed and
the respondents are directed to accept the candidature of the
petitioners and grant them for appointment to the post of
Graduate Trained Teacher along with all consequential benefits.
This entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 4
weeks from the receipt of copy of this order.
25. Accordingly, these applications stand allowed.
Pending I.A(s), if any, also stands closed.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Dated:14/10/2026
Amardeep/
A.F.R

Uploaded on
16.10.2026








19