Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Umesh Yadav vs State And Ors on 3 September, 2020

Author: Dinesh Mehta

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3776/2018 Umesh Yadav S/o Ratiram Yadav, R/o 12, Sudama Nagar 2Nd Chak 5E Choti District Shri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary, Medical And Health Department And Mission Director, National Rural Health Mission, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Additional Mission Director National Rural Health Mission, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur Rajasthan.

3. The Director State Institute Of Health And Family Welfare Rajasthan, Jhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur.

4. Additional Chief Medical And Health Officer, Hanumangarh.

5. State Head Gvk Emergency Management And Research Institute, Jhalana, Institute Area, Jaipur.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Navneet Singh Birkh
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Deepak for

Ms. Vandana Bhansali for respondent Nos.1 to 5 Mr. Kuldeep Mathur, for respondent No.6.

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order 03/09/2020

1. By way of the present petition under Article 226 Constitution, the petitioner has sought direction for grant of equal pay with that of regularly appointed employees in the Government department.

(2 of 3) [CW-3776/2018]

2. Mr. Mathur, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 at the outset submits that in view of the judgment dated 06.05.2019, rendered by Division Bench of this Court in DB Special Appeal (W) No.1625/2018 (GVK, EMRI Vs. Pavnesh Chandra & Anr.), the present writ petition is not maintainable.

3. Indisputably, the respondent No.6 - under whom the petitioner is serving, is a private Company.

The Division Bench of this Court in its order dated 06.05.2019 referred above has held thus :-

"The respondent had filed a writ petition complaining that an order of transfer issued by the appellant, a private company, involved inter alia in providing Emergency Medical Services, was arbitrary and needed to be set aside.

The appellant disputed jurisdiction of the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the services discharged by the appellant, i.e. providing ambulances etc. is essential and integral to the role of the State and connected to the discharge of its public obligation under Article 21 of the Constitution. On this ground, we over-rule the objection of the respondent and proceed to quash the transfer order.

This Court is of the opinion that the learned Single Judge fell into error in entertaining proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. Mere performance of ambulance functions, which the State might perform or is obliged to perform, per se does not invest in a purely private company, the role of State under Article 12 of the Constitution or constitute it as a public authority under Article 226 of the Constitution so as to attract judicial review jurisdiction, in matters of appointment and conditions of service of its employees.

(3 of 3) [CW-3776/2018] The impugned order was clearly erroneous in holding otherwise. The appeal is allowed. The writ petition is consequently dismissed."

In view of the enunciation made by Division Bench in case of none other than respondent No.6 i.e. GVK EMRI (supra), the writ petition is held not maintainable and dismissed accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 224-ArunV/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)