[2023/RJJD/012362] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16247/2022 Dilip Kumar Tailor S/o Shri Sohan Lal Tailor, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Ward No. 8, Darji Mohalla, Tehsil Sarada, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Director (Health Services), Medical And Health Services, Medical And Health Department, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marga, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Chief Medical And Health Officer, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8540/2022 Hemant Kumar Yadav S/o Kailash Chandra Yadav, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Yadav Mohalla, Sanwad, Mankhand, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Director (Health Services), Medical And Health Services, Medical And Health Department, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Chief Medical And Health Officer, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8667/2022 Lalit Kumar Patel S/o Kishan Lal Patel, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Kurabad, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner Versus (Downloaded on 28/04/2023 at 11:24:53 PM) [2023/RJJD/012362] (2 of 6) [CW-16247/2022]
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Director (Health Services), Medical And Health Services, Medical And Health Department, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Chief Medical And Health Officer, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Nikhil Dungawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lucky Rajpurohit for Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR Order 27/04/2023 Since the question involved in the all the three writ petitions is similar, therefore, they are being decided by this common order.
For brevity, the facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16247/2022 "Dilip Kumar Tailor Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors." are taken into consideration.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
"A] By an appropriate writ, order or directions, the respondent may be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner in pursuance of communication letter dated 22.12.2021 (Annex.-05).
B] By an appropriate writ, order or directions the Respondents may be directed to consider the petitioner to continue upon the post of Computer Operator in the pursuance of communication dated 22.12.2021 (Annex.-05) with consequential benefits."(Downloaded on 28/04/2023 at 11:24:53 PM)
[2023/RJJD/012362] (3 of 6) [CW-16247/2022] Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were engaged on the post of Man with Machine (Computer Operator) in the respondent-Department for a period of six months. The engagement of the petitioners was extended from time to time, however, after completion of their period of six months, further extension has not been granted and their engagement has been discontinued.
Learned counsel further submits that vide Communication dated 22.12.2021, the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Udaipur was informed by the Junior Specialist, Community Health Centre, Sarada, District Udaipur that there is huge workload and, therefore, he was requested to sanction one additional post of Computer Operator. He submits that on one hand the engagement of the petitioners is being discontinued and on the other hand the Officers of the respondent-Department have expressed their desire for the sanction of additional post of Computer Operator. He, therefore, prays that in view of the present facts and circumstances, the engagement of the petitioners should not be discontinued and they should be re-engaged by the respondent- Department for performing the work of Computer Operator.
Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioners have no right to continue on the post of Computer Operator as their engagement was only on contractual basis and it is for the Department to consider whether the available work in the respondent-Department is required to be completed with the present workforce available, or the (Downloaded on 28/04/2023 at 11:24:53 PM) [2023/RJJD/012362] (4 of 6) [CW-16247/2022] Department may engage other personnel for performing certain jobs.
Learned counsel for the respondents has relied upon the judgment of this Court rendered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5178/2022 "Pooja Chaturvedi & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors." decided on 11.04.2022.
Learned counsel further submits that in the event of any need being felt by the respondent-Department for engaging the present petitioners, the competent authorities will take a decision in accordance with law for re-engagement of the petitioners. He submits that the inter-departmental communication will not create any right in favour of the petitioners for their re-engagement in the respondent-Department.
I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case.
The petitioners were engaged in the respondent-Department purely on contract basis for a specific period. It is a settled proposition of law that the petitioners have no right to continue on the post of Computer Operator beyond the period of their engagement as per the terms of conditions entered into between the petitioners and the respondents. It is absolutely within the domain of the Department concerned whether to continue the contractual engagement of the petitioners on the post of Computer Operator or not.
This Court in the case of Pooja Chaturvedi (supra) has held as under:-
(Downloaded on 28/04/2023 at 11:24:53 PM) [2023/RJJD/012362] (5 of 6) [CW-16247/2022] "The engagement of the petitioners, was through placement agencies and there was no indication made that the same would continue till a particular point of time. The respondents, based on their requirement and coming to the conclusion that as the hiring of the contractual manpower was not permitted by the Government of India after 31.03.2022, has decided to terminate the services of the petitioners and required that the laboratories be manned by sufficient staff from the available staff. The prerogative of the respondents in deciding as to whether to continue with the contractual employees for rendering a particular kind of services or not, cannot be questioned.
The respondents are required to take decision based on several factors and have indicated that once the Government of India has not permitted the hiring of contractual manpower for the purpose, the decision taken by the respondents, cannot be faulted and/or the respondents cannot be directed to continue with contractual employment of the petitioners.
So far as the apprehension expressed by the petitioners that despite the indication made regarding non- hiring of the contractual manpower, after termination of petitioners' engagement, new contractual employees would be engaged, cannot be countenanced at this stage, as once the specific indication has been made that on account of non-permitting of the contractual manpower, existing contractual manpower is being terminated, there does not appear to be any reason for the said apprehension expressed by the petitioners.
In that view of the matter, no case for interference in the petition is made out. The same has no substance and the writ petition is, therefore, dismissed." Thus, the petitioners cannot ask for a mandamus for re- engagement as a matter of right.
The inter-departmental communication mentioned in the preceding para shows the dearth of manpower in the Department and the Department is in need of more helping hand to meet the pressure of work.
Since the respondent-Department is in need of a Computer Operator at its respective centers, therefore, this Court feels the ends of justice will be met if the present writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the re- (Downloaded on 28/04/2023 at 11:24:53 PM)
[2023/RJJD/012362] (6 of 6) [CW-16247/2022] engagement of the petitioners, in case their services are required at a particular place of the respondent-Department, in accordance with law.
Ordered accordingly.
It is made clear that on an appropriate representation being made, the respondents shall pay the remuneration to the petitioners if they have performed any work during the course of their engagement.
Stay petitions as well as other pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 23-25-/Vivek/-(Downloaded on 28/04/2023 at 11:24:53 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)