Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Gajendra Singh S/O Ram Bharosi vs Union Of India on 22 August, 2019
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
0HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14252/2019
1. Gajendra Singh S/o Ram Bharosi, Aged About 29 Years,
R/o Vpo Mamodhan, Tehsil Baseri, District Dholpur (Raj).
2. Satish Chand S/o Shri Parash Ram, Aged About 29 Years,
R/o Harnagar, Bharatpur (Raj.).
3. Manju Kumari D/o Shri Shiv Charan Sinkar, Aged About
40 Years, R/o 67, Nehru Nagar, Mungaska, Alwar (Raj).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of
Human Resources And Development, Lal Bahadur Sastri
Smriti, Maulana Azad Rd, Bal Bhavan, Man Singh Road
Area, New Delhi, Delhi 110001
2. National Skill Development Council, Through Its
Secretary, 301, 3Rd Floor, West Wing, World Mark 1,
Asset 11, Aerocity, New Delhi - 110037
3. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Education Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
4. Rajasthan Council Of Secondary Education, Through Its
State Project Director, Eklavya Bhawan, Dr. Srk Shiksha
Sankul, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur (Raj.)
5. The Additional State Project Director, Rajasthan,
Education Of Secondary Council, Eklavya Bhawan, Dr. Srk
Shiksha Sankul, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur (Raj.)
6. Rajasthan Vocational Education Training Project, Through
Its Additional Director, 1St Floor, Eklavya Bhawan, Dr. Srk
Shiksha Sankul, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur (Raj.)
7. District Education Officer Cum District Program
Coordinator, Integrated Education Program, District
Dholpur (Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashindra Gautam For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI (Downloaded on 06/06/2021 at 06:14:20 PM) (2 of 3) [CW-14252/2019] Order 22/08/2019 The petitioner preferred this writ petition claiming following prayers:-
It is, therefore humbly prayed that your Lordship may graciously be pleased to accept and allowed this writ petition and by an appropriate writ, order or direction:-
1. The respondents may be directed not to replace the petitioners (contractual employees) by another set of contractual employees for the reasons of change of placement agencies or otherwise in pursuance of the invitation of the online competitive bid for vocationalisation of secondary and higher education by the respondents, in the interest of Justice.
2. The action-omission on the part of respondents in engaging the petitioners and taking the work through placement agency/service providers may be declared arbitrary and accordingly the respondents may be directed to directly engage the petitioners on contractual basis, without any involvement of any placement agency/contractor, and they may be allowed to continue till the regular selections are being made by the respondents, in the interest of justice.
3. The respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioners to continue to work as Vocational Teachers/Trainers at their respective posting places, where they are working presently, in the interest of Justice.
4. The respondents may kindly be directed not to replace the petitioners by another set of contractual employees.
5. The respondent be directed to pay due salary of the petitioners along with interest.
6. Any other appropriate order, which may be found just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, be passed in favour of the petitioners.
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition is covered by the judgment rendered by this court in the case of Seema Gupta Vs. State of Rajasthan, decided on 06.08.2019.
(Downloaded on 06/06/2021 at 06:14:20 PM)
(3 of 3) [CW-14252/2019] On perusal, this court finds that the facts of the case are same as decided by this court in the matter of Seema Gupta (supra).
In the light of the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is allowed in the same terms. Operative portion of the judgment is quoted hereunder:-
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the factual matrix of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of these writ petitions while intervening on a limited count, which is that if the petitioners are having proper qualification and are eligible to be appointed as Vocational Trainers and were duly selected by the respondents strictly in accordance with law on contractual basis, then their services shall not be replaced by another set of contractual Vocational Trainers to be appointed in pursuance of the order dated 20th May, 2019. While observing as above, this Court makes it clear that this Court is not inclined to go into the legality of the order dated 20th May, 2019 at this stage as the same is not prejudicial to the interest of the present petitioners. The protection to the petitioners shall be strictly as per their qualification and eligibility and appointment based on legal selection process for the contractual post of Vocational Trainers. The substitution shall not be made by another set of Vocational Trainers being appointed in pursuance of the order dated 20th May, 2019. The respondents shall, however, be free to conduct the services of the petitioners as per the existing project and scheme. Lastly, while addressing the apprehension raised by counsel for the petitioners that their salaries are not being paid in time since long, we direct the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible.
(PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J ashu /115 (Downloaded on 06/06/2021 at 06:14:20 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)