Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 13657 MP
Judgement Date : 22 August, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 22 nd OF AUGUST, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 5651 of 2021
BETWEEN:-
COVID 19 SWASTHA SEWA SANGATHAN MADHYA
PR AD ES H , A SOCIETY REGISTRED UNDER THE
PROVISIONS OF THE MADHYA PRADESH SOCIETIES
REGISTRIKARAN ADHINIYAM 1973, HAVING ITS
OFFICE AT HOUSE NO.108, FRONT DASHMESH
DHARMKANTA, CHANAKYAPURI, BESIDE POST OFFICE,
REWA ROAD, TAHSIL RATHURAJNAGAR, DISTRICT
SATNA (M.P.), THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT, JITENDRA
KUSHAWAHA, S/O SHRI RAM NIWAS KUSHWAHA, AGE
30 OCCUPATION SERVICE, R/O 278 WARD NO. 13,
GOBRA KALAN, SATNA, DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI S.K. SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT,
VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION, MADHYA
PRADESH, THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR, 8,
ARERA HILLS, JAIL ROAD, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THROUGH
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH
SERVICES, MADHYA PRADESH, 6TH FLOOR,
SATPURA BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI ANSHUMAN SWAMY - PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1
AND 3/STATE AND SHRI YUVRAJ SINGH BAIS - ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.2)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TAJAMMUL
HUSSAIN KHAN
Signing time: 8/24/2023
3:00:38 PM
2
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that the issue involved in the present case has already been settled by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Dinendra Kumar Tripathi and others Vs. State of M.P. and others (Writ Appeal No.847 of 2022, decided on 02.08.2022). It has been observed therein as under: -
"The initial appointment of the petitioner was in case of emergency and was contractual in nature. Covid-19 Pandemic continued for almost two years and looking to the requirement of work of the petitioners their contractual appointment was extended from time to time. It is not disputed that the appointment of the petitioner was only contractual in nature as a emergency service. Now the effect of Covid- 19 Pandemic scenario is substantially reduced, therefore, no budget allotment was made by the Government for the services. As their services are no more required in the Department, the impugned order was passed.
The law with respect to contractual appointment is settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs. S.N. Goyal reported in (2008) 8 SCC 92, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi, reported in 2006 (4) SCC 1, State of Bihar and Others Vs. Kirti Narayan Prasad reported in (2018) 11 JT 540 wherein it is held that that a contractual employee is having no right for continuation of service and cannot even ask for extension of contract period. From the aforesaid law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court it is apparently clear that contractual appointee does not have a right to a s k for continuation in service. The appellants are not able to distinguish the judgment passed in the case of Ashta Dubey (supra) which was subsequently followed in a bunch of petitions main petition being Writ Petition No.11488 of 2022 (Dr. Dheeraj Rathore and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others) decided on 28.06.2022. The case is identical to the aforesaid case of Dr. Dheeraj Rathore (supra). No right accrues to the appellants to ask for continuation of services.
In view of the settled legal proposition of law, no illegality appears to be committed by the learned Writ Court.
The writ appeal sans merit and is hereby dismissed."
Signature Not Verified Signed by: TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Signing time: 8/24/2023 3:00:38 PM
2. In this context, the respondent No.2 have also placed on record the order dated 30.09.2022 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.1084 of 2022 and the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.11994 of 2022, dated 29.06.2022 (Dr. Bhupendra Singh Yadav Vs. Union of India and others) and other connected matters and order dated 17.05.2022 passed in Writ Petition No.11096 of 2022 (Ashta Dubey Vs. The State of M.P. and others).
3. The counsel appearing for the petitioner does not dispute the said propositions.
4. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed in terms of the order passed in the case of Dr. Dinendra Kumar Tripathi (supra).
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE taj
Signature Not Verified Signed by: TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Signing time: 8/24/2023 3:00:38 PM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!