Jharkhand High CourtRashmi vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 17 May, 2010Author:Amareshwar SahayBench:Amareshwar SahayIN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                             W.P.(S) NO. 1106 OF 2010

         Rashmi                                                  ... ... PETITIONER
                                    -V e r s u s -
      The State of Jharkhand and others                      ... ... RESPONDENTS


CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESHWAR SAHAY.

For the Petitioner :         Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, Advocate.
For the Respondents          Suresh Kumar, J.C. To G.P.-III


03/17.05.2010Heard the parties.The petitioner has challenged the appointment of respondent no.

       5 - Sunita Devi to the post of Angan Bari Sevika as contained in Annexure-1

       dated 22.10.2009, mainly on the ground that she is better qualified than said

       respondent no. 5 - Sunita Devi, who has been offered appointment by issue

       of Annexure-1.It is stated that the petitioner is a Graduate whereas, the

       respondent no. 5 is only Intermediate Pass and, therefore, as per Circular of

       the State Government, the better qualified candidate is entitled to be

       appointed as Angan Bari Sevika.The petitioner has stated in para-9 of the writ petition that the

       respondent no. 5 has passed only I.A. Examination. This statement made in

       para-9 in the writ petition has not been verified by the petitioner on

       Affidavit, therefore, such statement which is not supported by affidavit can

       not be placed any reliance.So far the claim of the petitioner that as per the Government

       Circular, better qualified candidate is required to be appointed, I find that

       the petitioner has annexed a Circular of the Government of Bihar issued in

       the year 1998. No any Circular issued by the Government of Jharkhand in

       this regard has been filed. Therefore, I find that the foundational facts

       required to be examined by this Court have not been stated in the writ

       petition, so as to call for any interference by this Court.Considering the aforesaid facts, this writ petition is hereby

       dismissed.(Amareshwar Sahay, J.)
RC