Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vaibhav Bhawsar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 February, 2024
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Ravi Malimath, Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 28 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 2307 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
1. VAIBHAV BHAWSAR S/O DURGA PRASAD
BHAWSAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: EX-GUEST FACULTY
(MECHANICAL DIESEL ENGINEER ) R/O VILLAGE
AND POST DHULKOT DISTRICT KHARGONE (M.P.)
2. JANKI YADAV S/O SHRI SITASHARAN YADAV,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION: EX-GUEST
FACULTY (TRADE RAC) R/O VILLAGE KHADGADI,
TEHSIL JAISINGH NAGAR, KUTHULI DISTRICT
SHAHDOL (M.P.)
3. RAMENDRA MALVIYA S/O SHRI HARGOVIND
MALVIYA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
EX-GUEST FACULTY (TRADE COPA) R/O 486,
SAMSHABAD VIDISHA DISTRICT VIDISHA (M.P.)
4. ANANYA SHRIVASTAVA D/O SHRI ANSHUL
SHRIVASTAVA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: EX-GUEST FACULTY (TRADE COPA)
R/O H-5, BLOCK COLONY, POHRI DISTRICT
SHIVPURI (M.P.)
5. PARO JAHAN D/O SHRI RIESUL HASAN, AGED
ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: EX-GUEST
FACULTY (TRADE DRAFTSMAN MECHANICAL)
R/O 39/1 PAAL MARG, LOHE KA POOL UJJAIN
DISTRICT UJJAIN (M.P.)
6. MOHD. SHAHRUKH QURESHI S/O MOHD. YUNUS
QURESHI, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
EX-GUEST FACULTY WELDER GOVT. I.T.I.
CHHATARPUR DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (M.P.)
Signature Not Verified
7. HARSHA THAKUR D/O SHRI ASHOK KUMAR
Signed by: VINOD
VISHWAKARMA
Signing time: 3/7/2024
6:30:59 PM
2
THAKUR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
GUEST FACULTY TRADE STENOGRAPHER HINDI
GOVT. I.T,I. CHHATARPUR DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR (M.P.)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI M.K. TRIPATHI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TECHNICAL EDUCATION
AND SKILL DEPARTMMENT VALLABH BHAWAN
BHOPAL (M.P.)
2. THE DIRECTOR SKILL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTM ENT NEAR SAI MANDIR, NARMADA
ROAD, JABALPUR DISTRICT JABALPUR (M.P.)
3. JOINT DIRECTOR, SKILL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT INDORE ZONE INDORE (M.P.)
4. JOINT DIRECTOR, SKILL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, GOVINDPUR BHOPAL DISTRICT
BHOPAL (M.P.)
5. THE PRINCIPAL GOVT. ITI. CHHATARPUR
DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (M.P.)
6. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL
EDUCATION (AICTE) THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN
NELSON MANDELA MARG, VASANT KUNJ, NEW
DELHI (DELHI)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI S.S. CHOUHAN - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR THE
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 5 AND
SHRI ASHOK KUMAR CHOURASIA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.6)
This petition coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
Vishal Mishra passed the following:
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
(i) That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call entire
records, files of the proceeding for its kind perusal.
(ii) That the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the
nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to give first
preference to the petitioners for regular recruitment on the post of
Training Officer Grade-3 and until the regular post is not filled up
by the petitioner, no fresh appointment on the post of Training
Officer Grade-3 be made, in the interest of justice.
(iii) That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an
appropriate writ commanding the respondents that until
regularization of Guest Faculty service of Guest Faculty should not
be removed by any condition, in the interest of justice.
(iv) Any other relief/order/direction which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may
also kindly be granted to the petitioner along with litigation."
2. The case of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Guest Faculty
(Mehman Pravakta) and had been working since last many years in the
Government Industrial Training Institute (ITI). An experience certificate in this
regard were also issued to them.
3. It is argued that despite the fact that the petitioners are eligible to be
appointed on regular post, they have not been permitted to continue on the post
of Guest Faculty. The petitioners have placed on record the orders of different
dates whereby their services have been put to an end. Placing reliance upon the
order dated 26.04.2022 passed in WP No. 6159 of 2022 (Pradeep Kumar
Yadav and others vs State of Madhya Pradesh and others) whereby this
Hon'ble Court has held that the petitioners therein be continued as guest faculty
teachers until and unless regular appointments are made, it is prayed that a
similar relief be extended to the petitioners and they may also be directed to be
continued as guest faculty till regular appointment is made.
4. Per contra, the counsels appearing for the respondents have vehemently
opposed the contention stating that the law with respect to the Guest Faculty
has been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as by the Division
Bench of this Court. A detailed order was passed by the Division Bench of this
Court in the case of Pradeep Kumar Yadav vs State of M.P. and others in WP
No. 6159 of 2022 dated 26.04.2022 wherein it has been settled that there cannot
be any replacement of Guest Faculty by another set of Guest Faculty. It is not
the case of the petitioners that they are being replaced by another set of Guest
Faculty, rather the period for which the petitioners were engaged as Guest
Faculty is over. Hence, the reliefs as sought for cannot be acceded to.
5. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
6. The record indicates that the petitioners were inducted as Guest Faculty
for a limited period. It is not a case of replacement of Guest Faculty by another
set of Guest Faculty. Guest Faculties are contractual employees appointed for
the academic session. The petitioners cannot claim continuation of services as a
matter of right. They have to show that they have been replaced by another set
of Guest Faculty which is not permissible in view of the judgment passed in the
case of Saurabh Singh Baghel and others vs State of M.P. and others reported
in 2019 (1) MPLJ 643 and in the case of Pradeep Kumar Yadav (supra) wherein
it has been settled that there cannot be any replacement of a Guest Faculty by
another set of a Guest Faculty. As, admittedly, there is no replacement in the
matter, no relief can be extended to the petitioners. However, the petitioners
may always participate in the selection process if any fresh advertisement is
issued by the respondents for the working of Guest Faculty.
7. The writ petition sans merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to
costs.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
VV
