Delhi High Court
Dipika S. Kumar And Ors. vs National Capital Territory Of Delhi And ... on 16 January, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2002IIIAD(DELHI)669
Author: Sanjay Kishan Kaul
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul
JUDGMENT Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.
1. On 13.2.2001 an opportunity was granted to file counter affidavit subject to payment of Rs. 500/- as costs. No counter was filed. On 13.8.2001 right to file the counter was closed. Rule has already been issued in the matter on 6.7.2000. It is thus a case of no return.
2. Petitioners were staff Nurses who were recruited in Govt. Hospitals during the time when staff Nurses resorted to an indefinite strike in May, 1998. Advertisement was issued in the times of India on 7.5.98 for qualified nurses required on short term contract immediately for Delhi Govt. Hospitals on Govt. approved wages. Requirement was for the nurses below 65 years of age and having approved Certificate/Diploma for Nursing from an approved institution and were required to attend walk-in-interview immediately on 8.5.98.
3. The office of the Joint Secretary (Health) issued a letter dated 20.8.98 for payment of salary to the Staff Nurses appointed on contract basis during the strike period on consolidated monthly salary/wages of Rs. 5800/- besides DA subject to the condition stated in the letter. This was followed by office order date 17.8.1998 of the MCD allowing creation of post for a period of 89 days for the said Nurses. The certificate issued by MCD dated 8.5.98 in respect to petitioner No. 1 is on record certifying that the original certificate has been checked and she is permitted to joint duty. The said letter is stated to contain an endorsement by the health Minister to the effect that Principal health Secretary may ensure that no staff nurse is victimised and those employed during strick period may be confirmed. Applications were thereafter submitted by the Nurses for regularisation but there has been no response.
4. Letter issued by Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Hospital dated 1.8.98 is addressed to the PHC/Joint Secretary (Health) in respect of deployment of staff Nurses on contract basis. The letter states that 52 Nurses were appointed on contract basis for period of 89 days vide office order dated 17.6.98 and which contract period was going to expire. It was requested to intimate whether the contract period is to be extended or their services were to be terminated from the date of letter.
5. In para-11 of the writ petition it is stated that all the Nursing Personnels appointed during the strike period were allowed to join duty in various hospitals after expiry of 89 days except the petitioners who were working with respondents No. 4 and were not given any extension of their services. It is thus contend by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners in the present petition are discriminated against in employment contrary to the decision on 20.8.98. The petitioners have stated that there are several posts of 'A' grade Nurses lying vacant in the Hospitals run by respondent No. 1.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners. Admittedly the recruitment was when Staff Nurses went on strike and petitioners were employed on contract basis. There is categoric averments in the writ petition, which has not been disputed, that all the other Staff Nurses recruited during that time have been continued to be so appointed and no reason has been shown why the petitioner in this case should be considered differently.
7. In view of aforesaid a writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondents to treat the petitioners similarly with the other Staff Nurses recruited during the strike and appoint them as 'A' grade Staff Nurses with consequential benefits on same terms and condition as other staff Nurses appointed during the period. Writ petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. Parties are left to bear their own costs.