Prantiya Rajpatrit Pashu Chikitsak ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 15291 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Prantiya Rajpatrit Pashu Chikitsak ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 May, 2024

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

                                                            1
                            IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                 ON THE 22 nd OF MAY, 2024
                                              WRIT PETITION No. 9672 of 2016

                           BETWEEN:-
                           PRANTIYA RAJPATRIT PASHU CHIKITSAK SANGH MP
                           BHOPAL SECRETARY A-15 SAHAB PARISAR, YADAV
                           COLONY (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI VIVEK SHUKLA - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
                                 SECRETARY MANTRALAYA, VALLABH BHAWAN
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    DIRECTOR VETERINARY SERVICES VAISHALI
                                 NAGAR KOTRA BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    DR. KUNJ BIHARI SHARMA, WORKING AS
                                 ANIMAL BREEDING PROGRAMMER OFFICER
                                 VETRINARY   SRVICES GWALIOR (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           4.    DR. RASHMI SHUKLA, WORKING AS DEPUTY
                                 DIRETOR VETERINARY SERVICES DESEASE
                                 INVESTIGATION     LABORATORY GWALIOR
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                           (STATE BY SHRI ATUL DWIVEDI - PANEL LAWYER AND RESPONDENTS 3
                           AND 4 BY SHRI AKASH CHOUDHURY - ADVOCATE )

                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                             ORDER

This petition is filed by one Prantiya Rajpatrit Pashu Chikitsak Sangh,

MP challenging the order of deputation of private respondent No.4 who was brought on deputation from Uttarakhand to Madhya Pradesh on the post of Deputy Director/ Animal Breeding Programme Officer.

Shri Akash Choudhury has taken a preliminary objection that this petition is not maintainable because in terms of the judgment of the Coordinate Bench in Central Professor/Scientist Technical Council Gwalior v. Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior2016 (2) MPLJ 319 , wherein it is held that benefit of promotion can be claimed by aggrieved person and a petition by the Society is not maintainable.

Shri Vivek Shukla, in his turn, has drawn attention of this Court towards

the bye-laws of the society as contained in page 6 of I.A. 3658/2016 wherein the Aims and Objects of the society have been underlined as follows:

Þ3- lfefr ds mn~ns'; %& lfefr ds mn~ns'; fuEufyf[kr gksaxs%& ¼1½ izns'k ds i'kqfpfdRldksa ds fgrksa vkSj vf/kdkjksa dk laj{k.k ,oa lao/kZuA ¼2½ lnL;ksa ds lokZxh.k leL;kvksa dk fujkdj.k djkus ds fy;s la?k ds ek/;e ls l{ke vf/kdkjh rd i=kpkj djukA ¼3½ lnL;ksa ds laokZxh.k fodkl ds fy;s leLr laHko iz;kl djukA ¼4½ lnL; ds fgr esa vU; la?k@lfefr;[email protected] ;k laxBu ls lac) gks ldsaxsaA ¼5½ lnL;ksa ds mPp vkn'kZ;qDr O;fDrRo dk fodklA ¼6½ jk"Vªh; thou esa Hkkjrh; vkn'kksZa ds izfr tkxj.k o fo'okl dk fuekZ.kA ¼7½ i'kqfpfdRld {ks= esa rduhfd dkS'ky o`f)] dk;ksZa dk foLrkj] 'kks/k dk;Z dks c< kok nsuk ,oa i= if=dk;sa izdkf'kr djukA ¼8½ i'kqfpfdRldksa ds ifjtuksa ds lokZxh.k fodkl ,oa mRFkku ds fy;s iz;klA ¼9½ lnL;ksa esa jk"Vªh; pfj= ,oa vuq'kklu dh Hkkouk ds fodkl gsrq fofo/k dk;Zdze vk;ksftr djukA ¼10½ leLr /keZ tkfr laiznk; ds lHkh oxZ ds xjhc] vlgk;] fu'kDr yksxksa dks Hkkstu dk

djkuk] BaM esa xje diM ksa@dcay dk iznk; djuk] izkd`frd vkink esa t:jreanksa rd lgk;rk igqWpkuk] xjhc dU;kvksa ds fookg ij lgk;rk] ykokfj'k yk'k ds vafre laLdkj ij vko';d O;oLFkk djuk] xjhc cPpksa dks eqQ~r dkih fdrkc ckWVuk] mUgsa f'k{kk dh O;oLFkk] xzh"edky esa I;kÅ dh O;oLFkk djukA ¼11½ ;qok i'kqikydksa dks i'kqikyu dh ubZ rduhfd dk izf'k{k.kA i'kqmipkj f'kfojksa dk vk;kstu fd;k tkosA ns'kh xkSoa'k ds laj{k.k gsrq iz;klA vkokjk dqRrksa dh la[;k dh jksdFkke ds fy;s ulcUnh dsEi vk;ksftr djuk ,oa muls euq";ksa esa jscht tSlh [krjukd chekjh u QSys bl gsrq fu'kqYd ,UVhjscht dsEi vk;ksftr djukAß

However, it is evident that none of the Aims and Objects of the society authorises it to file a Court case to protect the promotional or service interest of its members.

In view of such fact and law laid down in the case of Central Professor/Scientist Technical Council, Gwalior (supra) this petition is not maintainable. Therefore, the same stands dismissed. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the individual affected person(s) to agitate the matter in accordance with law.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE ks