Rajasthan High Court
Ramveer Sharma S/O Shri Shiv ... vs The State Of Rajasthan on 28 March, 2022
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 582/2020
1. Ramveer Sharma S/o Shri Shiv Prasad Sharma, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o 7, Mandir Basti Lalpur, Lalpur
Rehsena, District Dholpur.
2. Yogendra Singh S/o Shriniwas, R/o 48, Jat Basti,
Umarara, Tehsil Saipau, District Dholpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Medical And Health Department, Government Of
Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director, (Public Health) Medical And Health Service,
Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.
3. Principal Medical Officer, Freedom Fighter Late Dr. Mangal
Singh District Hospital Dholpur, District Dholpur.
4. Member Secretary, Rajasthan Medical Relief Society,
Freedom Fighter Late Dr. Mangal Singh District Hospital
Dholpur, District Dholpur.
5. Director, Super Ex-Servicemen Cos Private Limited, 121,
Kailash Nagar, Jhotwara, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arun Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s) : Dr. V.B. Sharma, AAG
Mr. Vivek Tyagi, Dy.G.C.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
28/03/2022
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the
following prayers;
"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the
Hon'ble Court may kindly accept and
allow this writ petition; and
i) by an appropriate writ, order or
direction in the nature thereof the
(2 of 4) [CW-582/2020]
impugned order dated 27.12.2019 issued
by the respondent No. 5 may kindly be
quashed and set aside.
ii) By an appropriate writ, order or
direction in the nature thereof the
respondents may kindly be directed to
allow continue to the petitioners on the
post of Computer Operator (man with
machine) at Freedom Fighter Late Dr.
Mangal Singh District Hospital Dholpur.
iii) Any other order which this Hon'ble
Court deemed just and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case may
be passed in favour of the petitioner."
Admittedly, there is no relationship of employer and
employee between the petitioners and the respondent Nos. 1 to 4
and the petitioners were employees of respondent No.5.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged
the order dated 27.12.2019 whereby their services have been
terminated by the respondent No. 5 i.e. Director, Super Ex-
Servicemen Cos Private Limited, who was employer of the
petitioners and the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have no authority to
terminate the services of the petitioners.
In support of the contention, counsel for the petitioners
relied upon the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in the matter of Tarun Prakash Damaya & Ors. Vs. The
State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
7681/2017) decided on 07.07.2017.
Counsel for the respondent(s) submits that the petitioners
were employees of respondent No. 5 and their services have been
terminated by respondent No. 5 and there is no relationship of
employer and employees between the petitioners and respondent
Nos. 1 to 4.
(3 of 4) [CW-582/2020]
In support of the contentions, counsel for the respondents
relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the matter of K.K. Suresh & Anr. Vs. Food Corporation of
India & Ors. reported in (2018) 17 SCC 641 where in Para-7 it
has been held as under;
"7.In the first place, the appellants failed
to adduce any evidence to prove existence
of any relationship between them and FCI;
second when the documents on record
showed that the appellants were appointed
by FCI Head Load Workers Cooperative
Society but not by FCI then obviously the
remedy of the appellants, if at all, in
relation to their any service dispute was
against the said society being their
employer but not against FCI; third, FCI
was able to prove with the aid of evidence
that the appellants were in the
employment of the said society whereas
the appellants were not able to prove
with the aid of any documents that they
were appointed by FCI and how and on
what basis they claimed to be in the
employment of FCI except to make an
averment in the writ petitions in that
behalf. It was, in our opinion, not sufficient
to grant any relief to the appellants."
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This writ petition filed by the petitioners deserves to be
dismissed for the reasons; firstly, the petitioners have not
submitted their order of appointment/contract agreement on
record which can show that they were employees of the
respondent-department; secondly, a bare perusal of the
termination order dated 27.12.2019 (Annexure-4) clearly shows
that the petitioners' services have been terminated by respondent
No. 5 i.e. service providing agency; lastly, as there is no
relationship of employer and employee between the petitioners
and respondent Nos. 1 to 4 no case is made out for interference
(4 of 4) [CW-582/2020]
by this Court under Article - 226 of the Constitution of India in
view of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
matter of K.K. Suresh (supra).
In that view of the matter, the present writ petition stands
dismissed. All the pending applications stands disposed of.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
CHETNA BEHRANI /36
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
