Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Poonma Ram Bishnoi Son Of Shri Asuram ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 October, 2020
(1 of 8) [CW-11525/2020]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
1. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11525/2020
1. Poonma Ram Bishnoi Son Of Shri Asuram Bishnoi, Aged
About 36 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Dawal,
Tehsil Chitalwana, District Jalore (Raj.).
2. Raju Ram Son Of Shri Poonama Ram, Aged About 34
Years, Resident Of Village Dadusan, Post Bawarla, Tehsil
Sanchore, District Jalore (Rajasthan).
3. Narpat Chouhan Son Of Shri Rameshwar Lal, Aged About
34 Years, Resident Of Panghat Road, Ward No. 13, Village
And Post Balotra, District Barmer (Raj.).
4. Prakash Son Of Shri Chunni Lal, Aged About 35 Years,
Resident Of Near Mahadev Temple, Village And Post
Asotra, District Barmer (Rajasthan).
5. Dinesh Panwar Son Of Shri Mangi Lal Panwar, Aged About
38 Years, Resident Of Near Mali Samaj Bhawan,
Gandhipura, Balotra, District Barmer.
6. Krishna Kumar Son Of Shri Uma Ram, Aged About 42
Years, Resident Of Dabari Chooti, Tehsil Taranagar,
District Churu (Rajasthan).
7. Prakash Bola Son Of Shri Hari Ram Bola, Aged About 35
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Goda, Tehsil Sedwar,
District Barmer (Rajasthan)
8. Suresh Kumar Bera Son Of Shri Jeetmal Bera, Aged About
36 Years, Resident Of Village Katholi, Tehsil Jayal, District
Nagaur (Rajasthan)
9. Raghunath Ram Suthar Son Of Shri Heera Lal Suthar,
Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Village And Post
Chitalwana, Tehsil Chitalwana, District Jalore.
10. Swaroop Singh Chouhan Son Of Shri Jaswant Singh
Chouhan, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Village And
Post Hotigaon, Tehsil Chitalwana, District Jalore
(Rajasthan).
11. Ramesh Chand Soni Son Of Shri Bhanwer Lal Soni, Aged
About 37 Years, Resident Of Village Kathoti, Tehsil Jagal,
District Nagaur (Rajasthan).
12. Surendra Kumar Joshi Son Of Shri Shyam Lal Joshi, Aged
About 37 Years, Resident Of Near Ashapura Complex,
Badgaon Road, Raniwara District Jalore.
(Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:04:54 PM)
(2 of 8) [CW-11525/2020]
13. Om Prakash Son Of Shri Rugnath Ram, Aged About 35
Years, Resident Of Village Balana, Post Arnay Block
Sanchore District Jalore (Rajasthan).
14. Mohan Lal Beniwal Son Of Shri Ram Chandra Beniwal,
Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Village Siwara, Tehsil
Chitalwana, District Jalore (Raj.).
15. Gopal Choudhary Son Of Shri Jora Ram, Aged About 35
Years, Resident Of Village Vamal, Post Itada, Tehsil
Chitalwana, District Jalore (Rajasthan).
16. Nanji Ram Son Of Shri Padma Ram, Aged About 35 Years,
Resident Of Village And Post Nainol, Tehsil Sanchore,
District Jalore (Rajasthan)
17. Dhanraj Son Of Shri Gopal Das, Aged About 36 Years,
Resident Of Panghat Road, Barmer (Raj.).
18. Tirthraj Son Of Shri Lekhraj, Aged About 32 Years,
Resident Of Juna Keradu Marg, Dhani Bajar Barmer.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Medical And Health Department, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. The Mission Director, National Health Mission, Rajasthan,
Medical, Health And Family Welfare Department,
Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.
3. The Director, R.c.h., Medical, Health And Family Welfare
Department, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur
(Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11686/2020
1. Rajender Singh Shekhawat S/o Umed Singh Shekhawat, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Karori, Vpo Rajnota, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Yuvraj Sharma S/o Omprakash Sharma, Aged About 40 Years, V/o Village Bhojpura Kalyan, Via Jobner, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Manoj Kumar Sharma S/o Shankar Lal Sharma, Aged About 42 Years, R/o P.no. 269, Nirmal Vihar, Benar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:04:54 PM)
(3 of 8) [CW-11525/2020]
4. Goutam Kumar Sharma S/o Raghunandan Sharma, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Bundi Ka Gothda, Gothra, Bundi, Rajasthan.
5. Navneet Kumar Sharma S/o Ramgopal Sharma, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Vpo Talwas, Via Karwar, District Bundi, Rajasthan.
6. Mohammad Irfan Khan S/o Siddique Hussain Khan, Aged About 39 Years, R/o House No. 419/37, Behind Gurdwara, Chhawani, Kota, Rajasthan.
7. Syed Anwar Husain S/o Abdur Rauf, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Mehman Khame Ke Pass, Fajal Ka Nada M. Mohalla, Sadat Malpura, Tonk, Rajasthan.
8. Naveen Jhajharia S/o Omprakash, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 35 Ward No. 1, Vpo Anana Jhajhadiya Ka Bass, Bhandara, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
9. Vincent Samuel S/o Cynil Kumar Samuel, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Chikitsa Karmi Aawas Colony, Chhatarpura, Bundi, Rajasthan.
10. Rajesh Kumar Sharma S/o Ramcharan Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Mali Mohalla, Ward No. 6, Tehsil Mangrol, Bhatwara, Baran, Rajasthan.
11. Uttam Rajeshwar Bharadwaj S/o Briraj Bharadwaj, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Ghatla Mandap, Kota, Rajasthan.
12. Jitendra Asolia S/o Mahendra Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o H.no. 217, Gate No. 4, Rajat Colony, Bundi, Rajasthan.
13. Ajay Kumar Sharma S/o Kailash Chandra Sharma, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Bassi Jatwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
14. Buddhi Prakash Sharma S/o Ramgopal Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 66, Behind Pwd Office, Lanka Gate, Bundi, Rajasthan.
15. Mahendra Kumar Agrawal S/o Narendra Kumar Agrawal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o House No. 118, R.k. Nagar, Police Line, Baran Road, Kota, Rajasthan.
16. Giriraj Prasad Jangid S/o Richpal Jangid, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Khati Ki Dhani, Morija, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
17. Ambrish Kumar Sharma S/o Bhagwati Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vpo Nasirabad, Tehsil Jhalarapatan, District Jhalawar, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:04:54 PM)
(4 of 8) [CW-11525/2020]
18. Ashish Sharma S/o Raghunandan Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Manohar Thana, Jhalawar, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners Versus
1. Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-110011
2. Ministry Of Ayush, Through Its Secretary, Ayush Bhawan, B-Block, Gpo Complex, Ina, New Delhi -110023
3. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Medical, Health And Family Welfare Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. The Special Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
5. The Special Secretary, Medical Health F.w. Department And Mission Director, National Health Mission (N.h.m.), Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Manju Jain
Mr. Ram Pratap Saini
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M S Singhvi, AG with Mr. Siddhant
Jain
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 12/10/2020 The petitioners, by way of this writ petition, has prayed that the respondents be directed to appoint the petitioners on the post of Community Health Officer from the date of completion of Bridge Course Programme with all consequential benefits.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in SBCWP No.11525/2020: Poonma Ram Bishnoi & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan, submits that the petitioners had completed their Bridge (Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:04:54 PM) (5 of 8) [CW-11525/2020] Course Programme in the year 2019 and other persons who had completed Bridge Programme in Community Health, were posted as Community Health Officer vide order dated 5.9.2018 by the respondents, however, now without posting the petitioners on the post of Community Health Officer, an advertisement has been issued on 31.8.2020 to fill up the post of CHO. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners who have become eligible to the post of Community Health Officer ought to be posted on the said post. The fresh advertisement could not have been issued without first giving the posting to the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that the purpose of completing the course was to have a job opportunity of being posted at Health and Wellness Center as Community Health Officer has laid down in the policy issued by the National Health Mission dated 25 th May, 2017. In view thereof, once the petitioners have completed their Bridge Course of six months, they ought to be posted on the post of Community Health Officer.
Learned counsel, Mr. R.P. Saini, appearing in SBCWP No.11686/2020: Rajender Singh Shekhawat & Ors. Versus Union of India & Ors., additionally submits that a bond was also undertaken from the candidates, who have completed the Bridge Course Programme, for the purpose of appointment as Community Health Officer, however, in spite of having submitted the bond, the petitioners were not given appointment as Community Health Officer.
In the opinion of this Court, such bond was only for the training purpose that if the post of CHO is offered after training he/she would not decline to join but it cannot be treated as a promise/guarantee for employment and therefore does not create (Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:04:54 PM) (6 of 8) [CW-11525/2020] any indefeasible right on the post of Community Health Officer. Learned Advocate General informs that the post of CHO has not been filled through any advertisement earlier and it is informed that the first advertisement was withdrawn and the present advertisement dated 31.8.2020 is actually the first advertisement for filling up the post of Community Health Officer.
Learned Advocate General has further submitted that the petitioner have completed their Bridge Course Programme which is in essential qualification under the advertisement dated 31.8.2020 and if they participate in the selection process and clear the screening exam, they would be posted as Community Health Officer, however, no automatic right is created in favour of any person who has completed the Bridge Course Programme and the petitioners ought to appear in the selection process which has been issued vide advertisement dated 31.8.2020.
Learned counsel has also pointed out that the condition laid down in the order dated 5.9.2018 whereby similarly situated candidates who had completed Bridge Course Programme were posted on the post of Community Health Officer clearly mentions that it would not create any right in favour of such candidates nor any financial benefit would be available to them nor they would claim for future posting on the said post.
Learned Advocate General has also taken this court to the condition laid down in the advertisement dated 15.5.2018 which mentions that the Bridge Programme in Community Health is of six months residential training course, the Department should not be responsible for posting/appointment on the basis of completing the said course. Thus, learned Advocate General submits that neither there was any promise of giving appointment nor any (Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:04:54 PM) (7 of 8) [CW-11525/2020] indefeasible right is created in favour of candidates who have passed the Bridge Course Programme to be directly appointed as Community Health Officer and they would have to undergo the screening exam which has been mentioned in the advertisement dated 31.8.2020.
I have considered the submissions.
While it is true that the petitioners have participated and have completed their Bridge Programme in Community Health for nurses under the advertisement dated 15.5.2018 and they are all substantially working as nurses with the State Government, has already held by me in SBCWP No.11161/2020 Toshib Ansari Versus State of Rajasthan, decided today no indefeasible right is created in favour of any person who has completed Bridge Programme in Community Health to be directly appointed as Community Health Officer. It is one of the essential qualifications which has been laid down by the National Health Mission for being posted/appointed as Community Health Officer.
It is also noticed that Community Health Officer's advertisement which has been issued on 31.8.2020 invites applications from all the candidates for the said post and lays down essential educational qualifications, the maximum age criteria and maximum monthly honorarium. It is thus purely contractual post which does not create any right in favour of any individual. All persons who are in service or otherwise who apply in accordance with the rules, can participate in the said advertisement provided that they possess the minimum essential qualifications as laid down therein. Petitioners do not get an automatic right of appointment without participating in the selection process. In view thereof, claim of the petitioners for (Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:04:54 PM) (8 of 8) [CW-11525/2020] being posted directly as Community Health Officer is wholly misconceived.
The writ petitions are found to be devoid of merits and the same are accordingly dismissed.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J NITIN /45 & 47 (Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:04:54 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)