Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Dr Pawan Kumar Agarwal And Ors vs State (Medical Department)Ors on 5 May, 2018
Author: M.N. Bhandari
Bench: M.N. Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writs No. 8750/2017
Dr. Pradeep Jain S/o Late Shri S.M. Jain, 2/208, Vidhyadhar
Nagar, Sikar Road, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary Medical
Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Rajasthan University Of Health Science, Through Its
Registrar, Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk
Road, Jaipur
3. The Chancellor, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences,
Raj Bhwan, Jaipur.
4. Dr. Arun Gupta, S/o Shri A.K. Gupta, Professor Ruhs,
Subhash Nagar, Jaipur.
----Respondents
Connected With D.B. Civil Writs No. 13225/2011
1. Dr.Pawan Kumar Agarwal, son of Shri Tulsi Ram Agarwal, aged about 59 years, Professor & HOD in Periodontics, Government Dental College & Hospital, Shastri Nagar, jaipur.
2. Dr. Dinesh Kumar Gupta, son of Shri Srikrishna Gupta, aged about 53 years, Professor and HoD, Department of Oral and Maxilloracial Surgery, Government Dental College & Hospital, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur.
3. Dr.Harihaar Prasad Trivedi, son of Shri Shri Murli dhar, aged about 55 years, Professor and Hod, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Government Dental College & Hospital, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur.
4. Dr.Vinod Suman, son of Shri Harish Chandar Suman, aged about 51 years, Professor and Hod, Department of Prosthodontics, Government Dental College & Hospital, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur.
5. Dr.Sandeep Tandon, son of Dr.Mool Narain Tandon, aged about (2 of 7) [CW-8750/2017] 47 years, Professor and Hod, Department of Pedodonitcs, Government Dental College & Hospital, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through the Chief Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, jaipur.
2. Principal Secretary to the Government, Medical & Health Department, Government of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences through its Registrar, Sector No.18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur.
----Respondent D.B. Civil Writs No. 9035/2016
1. Dr.Anjali Dave Tiwari wife of Shri Dr.Rajeev Lochan Tiwari, age about 55 years, Resident of 324, Shanti Path Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, presently working as Professor in Oral Surgery, in the Government Dental College and Hospital, Jaipur now @ re- designated as Rajasthan University of Health Science, College of Dental Sciences, Jaipur.
2. Dr.Uma Gupta wife of Shri Dr.Anil Gupta, age about 56 years, Resident of 133, Mohan Nagar, Gopalpura Bye-pass, Jaipur presently working as Professor in Oral Pathology, in the Government Dental College and Hospital, jaipur now @ re- designated as Rajasthan University of health Science, College of Dental Sciences, Jaipur.
3. Dr.Seema Choudhary wife of Shri Rajiva Choudhary, aged about 51 years, Resident of P-2, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, presently working as Professor in Orthodontics in the Government Dental College and Hospital, Jaipur now @ re- designated as Rajasthan University of Health Science, College of Dental Sciences, Jaipur.
4. Dr.Manju Gupta wife of Dr.Arun Gupta, aged about 59 years, Resident of A-275, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, presently working as Professor iand Head of the Department of Operative Dentistry (Conservative) Government Dental College and Hospital, Jaipur now re-designated as Rajasthan University of Health Science, (3 of 7) [CW-8750/2017] College of Dental Sciences, Jaipur.
5. Dr.Anjali Kapoor wife of Dr.Ajay Kapoor, aged about 50 years, Resident of 94, Sector-8, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, presently working as Professor and Head of the Department of Periodontics, Government Dental College and Hospital, jaipur now re-designated as Rajasthan University of Health Science, College of Dental Sciences, Jaipur.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan through the Chief Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Department of Medical and Health, Medical Education Government of Rajasthan through its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Rajasthan University of Health Sciences, College of Dentistry through its Registrar, Sector No.18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur.
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.A.K.Bhandari, Sr.Adv with Mr.Vaibhav Bhargava; Mr.Mamraj Gurjar with Ms.Shalini Sheoran For Respondent(s) : Mr.NM Lodha, AG with Mr.Deepak Bishnoi, Mr.RN Mathur, Sr.Adv with Mr.MA Khan, Mr.Prateek Mathur and Mr.Nihil Saini for University; and Mr.A.C.Upadhyay, for respondent no.4 Mr.Shyam Arya, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MAHESHWARI Judgment / Order 05/05/2018 This bunch of writ petitions has been filed to challenge the Notification dated 16.8.2011. In the writ petitions being DBCW (4 of 7) [CW-8750/2017] Pet. No.8750/17, DBCW No.13225/11 and DBCW Pet.
No.9035/2016, the challenge was even made to the orders dated 16.2.2017, 16.5.2017 apart from the order dated 17.4.2017. The writ petitions are thus having different grievances but involving common questions, hence directed to be heard together.
Brief facts giving rise to the litigation in the writ petitions can be summarized as follows:
All the petitioners were recruited under Rajasthan Medical Services (Collegiate Branch) Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1962"). They worked in the Dental Wing of Medical College. The options were given to them for Super- Speciality in Dental Courses. It was accepted, and whoever had done it, were assigned the work accordingly. They continued to work under the Rules of 1962.
A decision was taken by the Government to create separate Dental College. A notification for it was issued on 4.7.2000. All the petitioners were taken under the Dental College. They were given promotion from time to time in consonance to the Rules of 1962. While the petitioners were working in Dental College, the State Government came out with Rajasthan University of Health Science Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2005"). After the establishment an University by the Act of 2005, a decision was taken to bring Dental College under the University as its constituent college. A notification for it was issued on 16.8.2011.
(5 of 7) [CW-8750/2017] Since the Government Dental College was made as a constituent college of University, initially, all those working under the Dental College were continued as such. It was than made on deputation. A decision was taken to give option for the service under Rajasthan University of Health Sciences. Certain Associate Professors and Professors opted for services of Rajasthan University of Health Sciences while others refused to do so. In the first two writ petitions, a challenge has been made to the notification dated 16.8.11 to make Government Dental College to be a constituent college of University. The further challenge is to the option for absorption and till then to continue on deputation.
The counsel for the parties have made reference to certain letters issued by the Government to allow the petitioners on deputation, and at the same time, subsequent orders to withdraw it. The present writ petitions were filed to challenge to the notification dated 16.8.2011 and the orders. After hearing the arguments at length, it was submitted by the parties that if the petitioners are given one more chance to opt for the service under the University, the grievance can be resolved. The challenge to the notification dated 16.8.2011 or other orders pertaining to deputation would not be required to press. It has come on record that same petitioners are due for retirement within few months and others within a period of 2 or 3 years.
Initially, the court was of the opinion that the University and the Government should find out the possibility of a further chance of option for absorption in the services of the University but the counsel submit that this court may pass appropriate order to (6 of 7) [CW-8750/2017] resolve the issue. Thus looking to the facts of this case and as due to pendency of litigation, the University is unable to fill the post after advertising it, this court is passing the order to resolve the issue.
The grievance of the parties can be resolved if a direction is given to the respondents to provide one more opportunity to the petitioners to opt for services under the University and whoever opts for it, necessary orders be passed. Whoever fails to opt services under the University, should be sent back to the Government to be governed by the Rules of 1962. Anyone opt for service under the University, would be entitled to get benefit as are available under the Rules for all purpose. The University would be at liberty to make further selection to different posts which includes the post of Principal, Dental College, though it is not a cadre post till date. The requirement of post of Principal is in the light of the guidelines of the Dental Council of India. The cadre post is of Dean. The University can appropriately amend the rules, to make the post of Dean cum Principal so as to bring the post in the cadre and to make recruitment after giving opportunity to all the eligible candidates. It is for smooth and effective administration of the Dental College.
In view of the above, this court is not inclined to interfere in the Notification dated 16.8.2011 so as the orders under challenge. All the writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to the respondents to give one more option to the petitioners to opt for the services under the University specifying the time for option. Whoever opts for the services under the University, would be (7 of 7) [CW-8750/2017] absorbed. It is made clear that if anyone fails to opt for services under the University within the time given for option, it would be presumed to be a refusal and thereby would be reverted back to the service under the Rules of 1962.
The University would be at liberty to make selections on different posts. The arrangement of aforesaid has been directed to resolve the problem amicably after hearing the arguments at length.
Accordingly, directions given above would be carried out by the respondents at the earliest by specifying the period for option. If any dispute remain in regard to the benefit on absorption, the petitioners would be at liberty to take remedies.
The interim order passed by this court would continue till the direction given above are complied.
With the aforesaid, these writ petitions are disposed. A copy of the order be placed in each connected file. (DEEPAK MAHESHWARI),J (M.N. BHANDARI),J Sandeep/-5-7