Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jitendra Kumar vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:17478) on 4 April, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2025:RJ-JD:17478]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4228/2025
Jitendra Kumar S/o Shri Kundan Ram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o-
Meghwalo Ka Bass, Ahore, District-Jalore.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Joint Secretary, Ministry Of
Women And Child Development, Government Of India,
Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi - 110001.
2. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary-
Cum-Director, Directorate Of Child Rights, 22/198, Kaveri
Path, Sector-2, Mansarovar, Jaipur.
3. The Chief Executive Officer, Rajasthan State Child
Protection Society, 22/198, Kaveri Path, Sector-2,
Mansarovar, Jaipur.
4. The Assistant Director, District Child Protection Unit,
Jalore.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.S. Saluja
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Piyush Bhandari
Mr. S.D. Chavariya for
Mr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG
Mr. Piyush Joshi for
Mr. Abhishek Sharma
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
04/04/2025
1. Mr. Saluja, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely
covered by the judgment dated 13.01.2025 passed by this Court
in the case of Shobha Soni & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &
Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2192/2024.
2. Mr. Piyush Bhandari, learned counsel for the respondent -
State is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid position of fact
and law.
[2025:RJ-JD:17478] (2 of 3) [CW-4228/2025]
3. In the case of Shobha Soni (supra), this Court has held
thus:-
"12. It is not in dispute that the budget and
finance to the extent of 60% is provided by the
Central Government and 40% is borne by the
State Government. The State can neither shirk
from its statutory obligations to create these
posts nor can it ignore the mandate of the
Scheme.
13. This Court is of the view that the State
cannot engage personnel on the post of
Protection Officers and Outreach Workers
through a placement agency, as the job and
responsibilities being undertaken by the
Protection Officers and Outreach Workers cannot
be said to be services within the meaning of the
Act of 2012 read with the Rules of 2013.
14 These posts are mentioned in the Juvenile
Justice Act and the duties they are supposed to
discharge are statutory. Hence, engaging these
persons on Job Work Basis is wholly untenable
and arbitrary. Having regard to the job
responsibilities of Protection Officers and
Outreach Workers, their emoluments cannot be
determined and paid on the basis of job they
have performed; persons occupying such posts
are supposed to discharge continuous duties and
responsibilities.
15. As an upshot of discussion foregoing, the
impugned order dated 05.02.2024 is, hereby
quashed.
16. The respondent-State is directed to take up
requisite exercise of sanctioning requisite
number of posts of Protection Officers and
Outreach Workers and other incidental posts and
frame Rules in this regard.
17. Until such exercise is undertaken and
regular recruitment takes place, the State shall
be free to engage these persons on contract
basis, obviously in accordance with, more
particularly following what has been noted in
clause (i) of Para (B) of the District Annexure-III
of the Mission Vatsalya Guidelines, of course
after following due procedure including issuing of
a public notice.
[2025:RJ-JD:17478] (3 of 3) [CW-4228/2025]
18. Till such exercise is undertaken and new
persons are engaged through the process to be
adopted, the petitioners shall not be disengaged
save if they incur some disqualification or they
are guilty of some misconduct.
19. The writ petition so also the stay application
stand disposed of, accordingly."
4. The present writ petition also stands disposed of in the same
terms as in the case of Shobha Soni (supra).
5. Consequently, the impugned order dated 05.02.2024 is,
hereby quashed.
6. The respondent-State is directed to take up requisite
exercise of sanctioning requisite number of posts of Protection
Officers and Outreach Workers and other incidental posts and
frame Rules in this regard.
7. Until such exercise is undertaken and regular recruitment
takes place, the State shall be free to engage these persons on
contract basis, obviously in accordance with, more particularly
following what has been noted in clause (i) of Para (B) of the
District Annexure-III of the Mission Vatsalya Guidelines, of course
after following due procedure including issuing of a public notice.
8. Till such exercise is undertaken and new persons are
engaged through the process to be adopted, the petitioners shall
not be disengaged save if they incur some disqualification or they
are guilty of some misconduct.
9. The writ petition so also the stay application stand disposed
of, accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
3-akansha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
