Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dr. Vinod Gunkar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 November, 2019
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Writ Petition No.24934/2019
Dr. Vinod Gunkar and others Vs. The State of M.P. and others
Gwalior, Dated :22/11/2019
Shri Ashok Kumar Ahirwar, Advocate for petitioners.
Shri S.N. Seth, Government Advocate for State.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
**7-1 ;gfd] ;kfpdkdrkZ dh ;kfpdk Lohdkj djrs gq;s
jsLiksMsUV Øekad 1 yxk;r 3 dks funsZf'kr fd;k tkos fd
;kfpdkdrkZvksa dks Hkh foKkiu esa nh xbZ ;ksX;rk ds led{k
ekuk tkdj mUgs Hkh vkosnu izLrqr djus dk volj iznku
fd;k tkosA
7-2 ;gfd] ;kfpdkdrkZvksa ds leLr nLrkost ;kfpdk ds
lkFk ,usDpj ,&1 yxk;r ,&32 ekuuh; U;k;ky; ds le{k
voyksdukFkZ izLrqr gSA**
It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the
respondent no.2 has invited applications for undergoing six months'
bridge course training under the Community Health Programme on the ground that only those candidates who had graduated in BSc Nursing, GNM including BAMS degree have been included, however, the petitioners, who are holding BHMS degree, have been left out.
This Court in the case of Abhishek Parmar Vs. The State of M.P. and another by order dated 8/11/2019 passed in W.P. No.23625/2019 has held as under:-
"From the plain reading of Clause 11.4 of National Health Policy, 2017 and 4.49.9 of the recommendation of the Committee, it is clear that 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Writ Petition No.24934/2019 Dr. Vinod Gunkar and others Vs. The State of M.P. and others the National Health Mission may admit Pharmacists for bridge courses. Neither in the National Health Policy, 2017 nor in the recommendations of the Committee, it is mentioned that it would be compulsory on the part of the National Health Mission to invite Pharmacists also, to undergo the bridge courses. Unless and until the petitioner points out that the fundamental right has been violated or the advertisement issued by the respondents is contrary to the Policy or Act or Rule, this Court cannot interfere with the advertisement issued by the respondents. It is for the respondents to take a decision in this regard. If the National Health Mission has decided not to include the Pharmacists, then it cannot be said that the advertisement issued by the National Health Mission is contrary to the policy.
The Supreme Court in the case of Banarsi Das and Ors. Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. reported in 1956 SC 520 has held as under:-
"4. ....In our opinion, it is open to the appointing authority to lay down the requisite qualifications for recruitment to Government service and it is open to that authority to lay down such prerequisite conditions of appointment as would be conducive to the maintenance of proper discipline amongst Government servants....."3
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Writ Petition No.24934/2019 Dr. Vinod Gunkar and others Vs. The State of M.P. and others Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that no case is made out warranting interference.
Resultantly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia)
Arun* Judge
ARUN KUMAR MISHRA
2019.11.23 16:25:16 +05'30'