Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kumari Resham Meghwal vs Public Health And Family Welfare ... on 3 November, 2020
Author: S.C.Sharma
Bench: S.C.Sharma
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE
W.P. No.9524/2020 (-1-)
W.P. No.9524/2020
Kumari Resham Meghwal
Vs.
The State of Madhya Pradesh and another
Indore, dated: 03.11.2020.
Parties through their counsel.
The petitioner before this Court has filed this present
petition being aggrieved by the order dated 01.07.2020
passed by the respondents by which her services have been
put to an end.
Undisputed facts reveal that the petitioner was appointed by granting her compassionate appointment and appointment order was issued on 27.12.2012. She was appointed on probation basis with a condition to clear Hindi typing examination and computer operation knowledge.
The petitioner's contention is that M.P. Educational Board has discontinued Hindi typing examination since 2013 and the petitioner was not in a position to obtain Hindi typing certificate to her credit. The petitioner has further stated that the petitioner has obtained diploma in computer application in the year 2017-18 from a university recognized by the University Grants Commission. The petitioner has further stated that the respondents have issued a letter on 25.04.2017 stating categorically that the State Government HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE W.P. No.9524/2020 (-2-) through General Administration Department has permitted the candidates to obtain one of the six qualifications mentioned in the letter, which includes diploma in computer science and the petitioner has certainly obtained a diploma in computer science.
The petitioner has further stated that another letter was issued on 12.12.2017 directing the petitioner to clear Computer Proficiency Certification Test (CPCT) and the petitioner has submitted the diploma obtained by her from a recognized university. The petitioner's contention is that she is an appointee appointed on the compassionate ground and she holds the qualification of diploma in computer application and therefore, her services could not have been terminated in the manner and method it has been done.
The respondent No.2 has filed a reply and the respondents have admitted in the reply that on account of a circular dated 18.08.2008, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Grade-III on probation for a period of 3 years and she was required to obtain Hindi typing certificate to her credit along with proficiency in computer. The respondents have also stated that again a circular was issued on 28.06.2011 and time was granted to all candidates to pass Hindi typing examination within a period of 3 years.
The respondents have further stated that vide circular dated 01.07.2013, the mandatory requirement of Hindi HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE W.P. No.9524/2020 (-3-) typing was substituted with Computer Proficiency Certification Test (CPCT) conducted by the Professional Examination Board and the petitioner though she was appointed in the year 2012 has not cleared the aforesaid test.
The respondents have stated that the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Sachin Alawa and others (W.A. No.871/2018) has held the qualification of CPCT to be an essential qualification for the post of Assistant Grade-III and therefore, the petitioner as she is not holding qualification is not entitled to continue.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.
Undisputed facts further reveal that the petitioner was appointed by way of compassionate appointment. It is nobody's case that she was appointed by way of issuing an advertisement. At the relevant point of time when the petitioner was appointed under the policy granting compassionate appointment she was required to pass Hindi typing examination with proficiency in computer.
The undisputed facts further reveal that the board which was conducting the examination in Madhya Pradesh in respect of typing has stopped conducting examination in the year 2013. The petitioner was continued in service and while the petitioner was continuing she was granted time to obtain diploma in computer applications. The letter of Mahatma HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE W.P. No.9524/2020 (-4-) Gandhi Memorial Medical College dated 25.04.2017 reads as under:-
egkRek xk¡/kh Le`fr fpfdRlk egkfo|ky;] bankSj Øekad@ @LFkk@vfo-@17 bankSj] fnukad % izfr] v/kh{kd] ekufld fpfdRlky;] bankSjA fo"k; %& fu;fer djus fo"k;d@ dq- js'ke es?koky] lgk;d oxZ&3 ekufld fpfdRlky;] bankSjA lnaHkZ %& vkidk i= Øekad 772@LFkk@2017 bankSj fnukad 04-02-2017- mijksDr fo"k;karxZr vkids lanfHkZr i= }kjk dq- js'ke es?koky] lgk;d oxZ&3 dk vkosnu bl dk;kZy; dks izkIr gqvk gS ftlesa muds }kjk egf"kZ egs'k ;ksxh oSfnd fo'ofo|ky; ls dEI;wVj fMIyksek rFkk dEI;wVj Vk;fiax n{krk izek.k i= izLrqr djus gsrq vxLRk 2017 rd dk le; pkgk x;k gSA e/;Ikzns'k 'kklu lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ea=ky; ds Kki Øekad lh 3&07&2015&1&3 Hkksiky] fnukad 18 vxLr 2015 }kjk lgk;d xzsM&3] LVsuks Vk;fiLV ,oa LVsuksxzkQj rFkk buds led{k inksa ij lh/kh Hkjrh gsrq fuEukafdr ekU;rk izkIr laLFkkvksa esa ls fdlh ,d laLFkk ls ,d o"khZ; dEI;wVj fMIyksek mRrh.kZ djuk vfuok;Z fd;k x;k gS & 1- ;w-th-lh- }kjk ekU;rk izkIr fdlh Hkh fo'ofo|ky; ls fMIyksek A 2- ;w-th-lh- }kjk ekU;rk izkIr fdlh Hkh eqDr fo'ofo|ky; ls fMIyksek A 3- Mh-vks-bZ-,-lh-lh- ls fMIyksek Lrj dh ijh{kkA 4- 'kkldh; ikWyhVsfDud dkWyst ls ekMuZ vkWWfQl eSustesaV dkslZA 5- 'kkldh; vkbZ-Vh-vkbZ- }kjk ,d o"khZ; dEI;wVj vkWijsVj ,oa izksxzkfeax vflLVsUV izek.k i=A 6- dEI;wVj n{krk izek.khdj.k ijh{kk ¼lh-ih-lh-Vh-½A vf/k"Bkrk] e-xkW-Le`fr fpfdRlk egkfo|ky;
Øekad@6478@LFkk@vfo-@17 bankSj HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE W.P. No.9524/2020 (-5-) bankSj] fnukad izfrfyfi %& 1- dq- js'ke es?koky] lgk;d oXkZ&3] ekufld fpfdRlky;] bankSj A vf/k"Bkrk] e-xkW-Le`fr fpfdRlk egkfo|ky;
bankSj Thus, it is evident that vide circular dated 18.08.2015, the petitioner was required to obtain diploma which is one of the conditions mentioned in circular and the petitioner has certainly obtained diploma. The case of the petitioner cannot be treated at par with other employees, who have been dealt with by this Court / other employees who have applied for the post of Assistant Grade-III by virtue of fresh advertisement as she has been given appointment on account of death of sole earning member of the family.
It is true that the qualification of Hindi typing was initially required but the fact remains that the Board of State of Madhya Pradesh has stopped conducting examination since 2013. Not only this, the petitioner has obtained a diploma in computer proficiency. The petitioner has been appointed on account of the policy issued by the State Government on 18.08.2008 in which there was a condition of Hindi typing and computer diploma.
The executive instructions issued by the State Government in respect of Computer Proficiency Certification Test (CPCT) qualification have been issued on a subsequent HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE W.P. No.9524/2020 (-6-) stage and therefore, the appointment made earlier cannot be disturbed on account of the fact that the petitioner does not have CPCT qualification as already stated earlier. The petitioner is a compassionate appointee, she does have certificate issued by a university recognized by the University Grants Commission in computer application and therefore, the impugned order is bad in law specially in light of the fact that no such qualification of CPCT has been prescribed in the recruitment rules governing the field known as Madhya Pradesh Public Health and Family Welfare (Directorate of Health Services) Class-III Ministerial Service Recruitment Rules, 1989.
The qualification of CPCT is certainly mandatory qualification and the circular will have prospective effect. The earlier appointments on account of compassionate basis cannot be put to an end on account of such a qualification specially in light of the fact that the petitioner is holding diploma in computer application. Resultantly, the impugned order is set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner forthwith in service. The petitioner as she has not worked will not be entitled for back-wages, however, she will be entitled for all other consequential benefits.
With the aforesaid, present petition stands allowed.
(S.C. Sharma)
N.R. Judge
Digitally signed by NARENDRA
KUMAR RAIPURIA
Date: 2020.11.07 15:27:31
+05'30'