Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ankita Gupta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 March, 2017
W.P.Nos.- 9296/16, 9297/16, 9300/16, 9378/16,
9391/16, 9415/16, 9420/16, 9422/16, 9427/16,
9429/16, 9432/16, 9627/16, 9666/16, 9995/16,
11141/16, 12153/16, 12495/16, 12728/16, 13775/16,
13778/16, 13779/16, 13780/16, 13781/16, 13782/16,
13783/16, 13784/16, 13825/16, 14172/16, 14173/16,
14174/16, 14176/16, 14247/16, 14250/16, 14253/16,
14254/16, 14255/16, 14256/16, 14257/16, 14258/16,
14259/16, 14260/16, 14261/16, 15218/16, 15421/16,
15544/16, 15547/16, 15910/16, 16175/16, 16222/16,
16239/16, 16314/16, 16344/16, 16377/16, 16394/16,
16409/16, 16510/16 & 16856/16, 16756/16,
18945/16, 438/17, 880/17, 1686/17, 2215/17
28-03-2017
Parties through their counsel are heard at length.
In all these petitions, petitioners are appointed on contract basis
as Manager, Trainer, Office Assistant cum Accountant or Class IV
employees as per Module prepared for establishing the Kaushal Vikas
Kendras in the State in furtherance to the resolution of Legislative
Assembly No. 50 for upliftment of vocational education, ITI Institutes
or to restructure and upgrade them. Accordingly, M.P. Council for
Vocational Education and Training has been created. As per the object
of the Scheme, total 133 Skill Development Centres have been decided
to be established. The purpose to bring the scheme was to provide skill
development of the teenager boys and girls of the rural areas thereby
after getting training, they may be self employed. The description of
courses, which shall be continued in those Centres have been specified
in Enclosure I. The Government has created the posts for running those
Centres on contract basis. Those are known as Manager (1 post),
Office Assistant cum Accountant (1 post), Trainer (4 posts for 4
Modules) and Helper (2 posts). Accordingly, for each Centre, total 8
posts were sanctioned specifying their remuneration on contract basis.
Petitioners were appointed initially for 2 years on contract after
following the procedure, which was extended for 1 year on those
sanctioned posts. It is not in dispute that MPCVET has issued a letter
dated 11.5.2015 inter alia contending that the employees working on
contract basis in Kaushal Vikas Kendra and completed 3 years of
contract employment, their proposal for extension of services has been
sent to the Government and till decision by the Government, they shall
not be removed and the payment, as they were receiving, would
continue to be paid to them, accordingly they continued on the posts.
After one year, MPCVET has passed an order dated 16.5.2016
directing to all the officials to terminate the services of the employees
working under 133 Kaushal Vikas Kendras. However, assailing the
same, petitioners have come before this Court seeking direction to
continue them on the posts, on which they were appointed.
This Court initially granted stay with further direction that no
fresh appointments shall be made in this matter. Thereafter,
respondents have filed a reply inter alia contending that they are going
to fill up those posts by way of fresh selection on contract basis following the procedure, and the order of stay would create impediment in the process of selection, therefore, stay may be vacated.
On filing such reply and considering the application seeking vacation of the stay, this Court passed the order clarifying the stay order directing that the petitioners who are continuing and are still working by virtue of interim order in their favour, they shall continue till fresh selection and appointment is made on contractual basis. Liberty was also granted to the petitioners to apply and participate in the process of selection.
After passing the order in August, 2016 till this time process of selection has not yet started. Now, the respondents have filed two letters dated 24.1.2017 and 27.2.2017. Those letters are internal correspondence from the MPCVET communicating to the office of Advocate General that as per the meeting presided over by the Chief Minister on 12.1.2017, 133 Kaushal Vikas Kendras must be continued but the post of Manager is not required to fill up by contract appointment and its duty must be assigned to the Training Superintendent, appointed in regular establishment of the Department. The post of Trainer must be taken from the outsource Agency or they may be called as member of the Guest Faculty and work of Assistant cum Accountant be assigned to Assistant Grade III of the Nodel ITI. Nothing has been said about the post of Helper. Thus, it is apparent that, initially the stand of the Government was that by order of stay passed by this Court, the process of selection of these posts, is being obstructed, therefore, stay may be vacated and after modification of the said order, now the Government has come up with a different stand that the post of Manager should be filled up by way of deputation from the Training Superintendent. Nothing is available on record to demonstrate how many Training Superintendents are working in the State and whether they be posted by way of deputation as per rules. It is not clear under what circumstances, the decision of outsourcing has been taken on the post of Trainers, though post was sanctioned in the scheme. It is not available on record that the said scheme was amended or withdrawn or post is abolished. So far as posts of Assistant cum Accountant are concerned, employees working in the Nodel ITI as Assistant Grade III have assigned the said work but the ITIs are only 37 and for the remaining Kaushal Vikas Kendras, ITIs are not available then how such posts may be filled by assigning the work to employees of different Department. Nothing is available on record to understand whether Assistant Cum Accountant working in ITI and required to be taken by the Government are the excess staff available to perform the work of Kaushal Vikas Kendra. In absence thereto, in my considered opinion, on the basis of documents produced by the respondents/State, there is no occasion to vacate the stay order. In that view of the matter, the stay granted by this Court on 22.8.2016 shall remain in operation till final decision of these petitions.
Respondents are directed to file their consolidated reply of each and every facts in individual case within two months taking their firm stand what they want to plead before this Court justifying their act to fill up those posts in the manner as propsoed now and it is not contrary to original policy of State to establish the Kaushal Vikas Kendras in the State.
As the application seeking further vacation of stay has been rejected, however, the modified interim order passed on 22.8.2016 shall remain in operation in all the connected cases and this order be kept in all the cases.
In view of the foregoing, all these petitions are adjourned for two months.
It is put forth by the petitioners that they are not getting salary though they are working as per stay order . In this regard, it is made clear that the persons who are continuing by virtue of order of stay passed by this Court, they be paid the salary by the Government as per their contract.
List all these petitions for analogous hearing along with W.P. Nos. 7128/2016 and 11635/2016 after two months.
(J.K. MAHESHWARI) JUDGE PB