Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rakhi Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 July, 2018
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
W.P. No.4096/2018
(Rakhi Sharma Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated: 12.07.2018
Shri Alok Sharma, Advocate with Shri S.S. Chauhan ,
Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Vivek Jain, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the present petition invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution claiming the following reliefs:
(i) To direct respondents for not to discontinue petitioner on expiry of contract period.
(ii) To consider the candidature of the petitioners for the post of Guest Faculty post when process of regular selection at the post is made and if petitioners are found suitable she may be appointed.
(iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction in nature or writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in facts and circumstances of the case.
Cost of the petition may also be allowed. Present petition has been filed under an apprehension that service of petitioner, who had been engaged on temporary basis for one particular session, would stand terminated on expiry of academic session and on holding of regular selection and appointment on the post of Guests Faculty in the Government ITI, Distt. Shivpuri.
During the pendency of this case, the Government has come out with a policy decision dated 30.06.2016 vide No. 1705/1490/2018/c;kyhl@2 issued by the State (Dept of Technical 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH W.P. No.4096/2018 (Rakhi Sharma Vs. State of M.P.) Education, Skill Development & Employment) that Guest Faculty who were appointed in the ITI should be allowed to continue even in the next academic sessions for which no separate procedure, advertisement or selection would be required.
Learned counsel for the State does not dispute the said instructions of the Government who contends that the issue of right of Guest Faculty to continue in service is pending before the Apex Court, to which the learned counsel for the petitioner responds that the said issue pertains to the Department of Higher Education and not to the Technical Education, Skill Development & Employment Department.
Be that as it may, this Court would not like to go into the aspect as to whether any dispute of similar nature is pending in the Apex Court or not, since the State has already taken a policy decision to continue the existing serving guest faculty in the ITI's which includes the petitioner, the grievance raised by the petitioner in the present petition for the time being stands satisfied.
In view of the above, the present petition having become infrucutous is disposed of.
(Sheel Nagu) Judge sh/-
SEHAR HASEEN 2018.07.13 17:26:14 +05'30'