Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Meghna Pareek vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 7 October, 2024
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2024:RJ-JD:40895]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16373/2024
1. Meghna Pareek D/o Jagdish Prasad Pareek, Aged About
27 Years, At Present Working At Chc Asind, Block Asind,
District Bhilwara (Raj.). (Date Of Joining 09-10-2023)
2. Usman Usta S/o Ishak Mohammed, Aged About 24 Years,
At Present Working At Chc Kotri, Block Kotri, District
Shahpura (Raj.). (Date Of Joining 08-10-2023)
3. Anusuya Sharma D/o Parmeshwar Lal Sharma, Aged
About 24 Years, At Present Working At Chc Pander, Block
Jahazpur, District Shahpura (Raj.). (Date Of Joining 08-
10-2023)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Department Of Medical And Health Services, Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.).
2. The Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services,
Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).
3. The Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical, Health And Family
Welfare Department, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg,
Jaipur (Raj.).
4. The Joint Director, Medical And Health Services, Udaipur
Zone, Udaipur.
5. Nodal Officer, Mnjy, Medical And Health Services,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6. Rajasthan Medical Services Corporation Limited (Rmsc),
Department Of Medical And Health Services, Swasthya
Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its
Managing Director.
7. The Principal Medical Officer, Bhilwara
8. The Principal Medical Officer, Shahpura
9. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Bhilwara
10. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Shahpura
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shree Kant Verma
Mr. Pritam Joshi.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
07/10/2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
[2024:RJ-JD:40895] (2 of 4) [CW-16373/2024]
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a
judgment rendered by this court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.12243/2024 (Shruti Moyal & Ors. V/s State of
Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 30.07.2024 in the following
terms:-
"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with the following
prayers:-
"A. the action of the respondents while terminating the
services of the petitioners from the post of Assistant
Radiographer, Lab Technician and Assistant lab
Technician on the ground of availability of regularly
selected Lab Technicians despite the fact that posts are
still lying vacant, may kindly be declared per se illegal,
arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Constitution
of India.
B. The impugned orders dated 12.07.2014 (Annexure-
7) may kindly be quashed and set aside.
C. The impugned termination order of petitioner No.1
dated 10.07.2024 (Annexure-8) and order dated
10.07.2024 (Annexure-9) by which services of
petitioners No.1 have been terminated and all orders
issued by the respondents in the intervening period,
terminating the services of the petitioners, may kindly
be ordered to be quashed and set aside.
D. the respondents may kindly be directed to reinstate
the services of the petitioners and they be permitted to
continue their services on their respective post.
E. The respondents may kindly be directed not to
replace the petitioners till the agreement of the
petitioners come to an end.
F. That the respondents may be restrained from dis-
continuing services of the petitioners and/or the
present place of posting of the petitioners may not
changed."
[2024:RJ-JD:40895] (3 of 4) [CW-16373/2024]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were appointed on the urgent temporary basis for a
period of 3 months or till the regularly selected employees are
available with the respondent-Department, whichever is earlier.
Learned counsel submits that the regularly selected employees
are available with the respondent-Department, thus, the services
of the petitioners have been dispensed with vide order dated
10.07.2024.
4. Learned counsel further submits that after the regularly
selected persons having joined in the respondent-Department,
still there are number of vacancies available with the
respondent-Department for the post of Lab Technician and
Assistant Radiographers. He, therefore, prays that the
respondents may be directed that in case, there are vacancies
available in the Department and they are in need of services of
the petitioners, the petitioners' services can be adjusted in the
nearby areas of District Pali/Beawar.
5. Considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, the writ
petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.7-
Chief Medical and Health Officer, Beawar & respondent No.8-
Chief Medical and Health Officer, Pali to ascertain the number of
vacancies available with them in their jurisdiction and if they
desire to take the services of the petitioners on the post
available, the petitioners may be adjusted or accommodated to
serve on those posts till the regularly selected candidates are
available with the respondent-Department.
6. It is made clear that if any of the petitioner is not
discharging his duties satisfactorily, the respondents will be free
to discharge him from the employment.
7. Stay petition as well as other pending applications, if any,
shall also stand disposed of".
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners may be permitted to file an appropriate representation
before the respondents in light of judgment rendered by this Court
in the case of Shruti Moyal (supra) for redressal of their
grievances.
[2024:RJ-JD:40895] (4 of 4) [CW-16373/2024]
4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of
in terms that in the event of filing a representation by the
petitioners, the same shall be considered and decided by the
respondents at the earliest preferably within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, keeping in
mind the law laid down by this Court in the case of Shruti Moyal
(supra).
5. The order has been passed based on the submissions made
in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the
veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case,
the averments made therein are found to be correct, the
petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
53-Shahenshah/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
