Prahlad Sahay Ghasal S/O Shri Nanu ... vs Employees State Insurance ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2666 Raj/2

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                 BENCH AT JAIPUR

             D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14618/2020

1.   Prahlad Sahay Ghasal S/o Shri Nanu Ram Ghasal, aged
     about 34 Years, R/o Ghasalo Ki Dhani, Sherawatpura,
     Amer,     District    Jaipur-302028,             Rajasthan.       Presently
     working as I.T. Manager in ESIC Jaipur.
2.   Chetan Mahaur S/o Shri Mangal Singh Mahaur, aged
     about 32 Years, R/o Damapura, Gadarpura, Dholpur,
     Rajasthan 328008. Presently working as I.T. Manager in
     ESIC Jaipur.
3.   Anoop Singh Choudhary S/o Shri Ram Kanwar Choudhary,
     aged about 34 Years, Village Kherli, District Alwar,
     Rajasthan 321606. Presently working as I.T. Manager in
     Bhiwadi ESIC Modal Hospital.
4.   Govind Krishna Sharma S/o Shri Sitaram Sharma, aged
     about 28 Years, R/o 1-B, Vikas Nagar, Murlipura, Sikar
     Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302039. Presently working as I.T.
     Assistant in ESIC Jaipur.
5.   Dheeraj Singh Rawal S/o Shri Ishwar Singh Rawal, aged
     about 29 Years, R/o 3023, Shreenath Footwear, Sector-9,
     Hiranmagri,      Udaipur,        Rajasthan          313002.       Presently
     working as I.T. Assistant in ESIC Jaipur.
6.   Manish Ranjan S/o Shri Mukesh Thakur, aged about 28
     Years, R/o Post Office Bhowara, District Madhubani,
     Bihar- 847212. Presently working as I.T. Assistant at
     Bhiwari Modal Hospital, Alwar.
7.   Sandeep Bhavsar S/o Shri Satyanarayan, aged about 31
     Years, R/o Namendra Bhawan, Sutharwala, Udaipur,
     Rajasthan 313001. Presently working as I.T. Assistant at
     ESIC, Sub Regional Officer, Udaipur.
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                 Versus
1.   Employees State Insurance Corporation, Through its
     Director General, Panchdeep Bhawan, Comrade Inderjeet
     Gupta (CIG) Marg, New Delhi-110002.
2.   Regional       Director,        Employees                State   Insurance
     Corporation,      Regional         Office,       Panchdeep        Bhawan,
     Bhawani Singh Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur-302005 (Raj.)


                  (Downloaded on 13/07/2021 at 09:15:23 PM)
                                          (2 of 5)                   [CW-14618/2020]


                                                                 ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Shri Amit Mathur through VC For Respondent(s) : Shri Namo Narayan Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

Judgment

07/07/2021

(PER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL):

This writ petition is directed against the order dated

2.12.2020 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur

Bench, Jaipur whereby the OA No.291/429/2018 preferred by the

petitioners has been dismissed.

The facts in brief are that the petitioners were engaged by

the respondent-Employees State Insurance Corporation (for

brevity-`ESIC') as IT Managers and IT Assistants in the year 2016

on contract basis initially for a period of one year which was

extended for further one year and lastly for three months, i.e.,

upto 31.8.2018. Vide its decision dated 10.08.2018, the

respondents decided to engage IT Managers and IT Assistants on

contract basis in future through National Informatics Centres

Services of India (for short-`the NICSI'), a Government of India

Enterprises, empanelled agencies. For the Rajasthan region, SISL

Infotech Pvt. Ltd. was chosen as such agency. Assailing this

decision, the petitioners filed the aforesaid OA with further prayer

to direct the respondents to continue them in service till the

regular appointments are made. The OA came to be dismissed by

the learned Tribunal vide its order impugned herein.

(3 of 5) [CW-14618/2020]

Assailing the order, the learned counsel for the petitioners

contended that impugned order is in violation of the principle of

law that one set of contractual employees cannot be replaced by

another set of contractual employees. He submitted that the

respondents cannot engage services of IT Managers and IT

Assistants afresh on contract basis and the petitioners are entitled

to continue as such till regularly selected candidates join. He,

therefore, prayed for quashing the order dated 2.12.2020.

Learned counsel for the respondents supporting the

impugned order submitted that they have taken a conscious policy

decision to engage IT Managers and IT Assistants through NICSI

throughout its Offices and Hospitals PAN India. He further

submitted that many of the petitioners are already working with

the respondents under the new system i.e. after their engagement

through empanelled agency.

Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the

record.

Indisputedly, the services of the petitioners were hired on

contractual basis initially for a period of one year which was

extended for another year and lastly for a period of three months

i.e. upto 31.8.2018 and their term of contract has come to an end

by efflux of time. It is trite law that a person engaged purely on

contractual basis for a fixed term has no right to claim

continuation after the period of contract has come to an end.

Further, the respondents have taken a policy decision to engage in

future the services of IT Managers and IT Assistants for its offices

and hospitals throughout India through the IT Manpower

supplying agencies empanelled by the NICSI, a Government of

India undertaking which does not suffer from any arbitrariness so

(4 of 5) [CW-14618/2020]

as to warrant interference by this Court in its writ jurisdiction.

Moreover, many of the petitioners are already working with the

respondents through empanelled agency, an assertion not

disputed by learned counsel for the petitioners.

In so far contention of learned counsel for the petitioners

that they are entitlted to continue as contractual employees till the

regularly selected candidates join is concerned, admittedly the

posts of IT Managers and IT Assistants are not encadred and

hence, there is no occasion to have regular employees on these

posts. A Division Bench of this Court has, in the case of SBI & Ors.

vs. Ashish Kumar & Ors.-MANU/RH/0821/2018, held as under:

"33. The learned Single Judge has erred in arriving at the conclusion that the respondents contractual employees, could be replaced only by regularly selected employees inasmuch as, admittedly, the posts of BCs were never the cadred posts either in SBBJ or in SBI and therefore, the question of filling of such posts by way of regular selection, does not arise.

34. Further, the term of the respondents' engagement as individual BCs having come to an end, this court can neither direct the respondents to extend the term of the contract nor such contract for service could be directed to be enforced by this court, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is open for the respondents to accept or not to accept their engagement through National BCs or sue the respondents by availing appropriate remedy available under the law for breach of the contract, if any xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx."

In the aforesaid circumstances, we are not persuaded to

interfere with the order dated 2.12.2020 passed by the learned

(5 of 5) [CW-14618/2020]

Tribunal which does not suffer from any perversity or patent

illegality warranting interference by this Court under its

extraordinary jurisdiction.

Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed devoid of merit.

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J (SANGEET LODHA),J

RAVI SHARMA /6

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)