Allahabad High Court
Shaijad Khan vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 13 May, 2022
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Jayant Banerji
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 3
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 365 of 2022
Appellant :- Shaijad Khan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Suresh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. This special appeal has been filed praying to set aside the impugned judgement and order dated 23.2.2021 in Writ-A No. 37760 of 2017 (Shaijad Khan Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) passed by learned Single Judge.
3. The appellant-petitioner had filed the aforesaid writ petition praying to issue a writ/order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to issue appointment letter to the petitioner on the post of 'Gram Rojgar Sevak' in Gram Panchayat Rajpur Vikas Khand Khair, District Aligarh. The appellant-petitioner has completely failed to show any statutory provision or Government Order which give him right for appointment. On the contrary, the learned Single Judge has recorded the following findings in the impugned order:
"The above judgment of the Division Bench has been followed in Writ Petition No. 26247 of 2018, wherein this Court has clearly observed that the appointment on the post of Gram Rojgar Sewak is not an appointment to any post nor any status is conferred on the basis of such appointment and the appointment otherwise is purely in the nature of contract of personal service, which cannot be enforced. The only remedy available would be to seek damages.
In the facts of the present case also the appointment is being sought on the post of Rojgar Sewak. The engagement as Rojgar Sewak is purely a contractual appointment, which is regulated by the Government Order dated 23.11.2007. The Government Order clearly provides that such appointment is for a period of one year and can continue for a maximum term of two years. Paragraph 7 of the Government Order dated 23.11.2007 provides that the decision of the Gram Panchayat would be final in case any dispute regarding contract arises. The Gram Panchayat, however, is not arrayed as a party in this petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the order passed in Special Appeal Defective No. 642 of 2010, in which the Government Order dated 23.11.2007 was assailed. An interim order directing status quo to continue in respect of such appointees is relied upon. This interim protection will not confer any right upon the petitioner, as termination order passed against them was challenged therein, whereas no appointment order is issued to the petitioner in the facts of the present case. The other judgment relied upon by the petitioner in Shiv Manorath Shukla and others vs. State of U.P. and others, Writ Petition No. 56644 of 2010 is in respect of Panchayat Mitra and not Gram Rojgar Sewak.
Since the appointment claimed in this case is contractual in nature and the petitioner otherwise has not been issued any formal letter of appointment, no writ would lie for issuing an appointment letter to the petitioner.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed."
4. We are in complete agreement with the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, we do not find any good reason to interfere with the judgement.
5. Consequently, special appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 13.5.2022
A. V. Singh
