Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh Parte vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 March, 2024
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Ravi Malimath, Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 18 th OF MARCH, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 3793 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
1. RAJESH PARTE S/O BABULAL PARTE, AGED
ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ITI GUEST
FACULTY TRADE MATH/DRAWING ITI
NARMADAPURAM DISTRICT NARMADAPURAM
VILLAGE BADORI POST KALGANV DISTRICT
BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VIJAY UIKEY S/O SANTOSH RAO UIKEY, AGED
ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ITI GUEST
FACULTY TRADE (DIESEL MECHANIC) ITI
NARMADAPURAM DISTRICT NARMADAPURAM
R/O VILLAGE KUMBHIKHEDA POST WANDLI
DISTRICT BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SMT KUSUM YADAV D/O INDRASAN SINGH
YADAV, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
ITI GUEST FACULTY TRADE (MOTOR MECHANIC
VEHICLE ITI VIDISA DISTRICT VIDISA R/O WARD
NO.2 BANIYA TOLA, BUDHAR, DHANPURI,
DISTRICT SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. GAYATRI SINGH W/O RAJBAHADUR SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ITI GUEST
FACULTY TRADE (ELECTRONICS MECHANIC) ITI
SIDHI DISTRICT SIDHI R/O VILLAGE AND POST
HADBADO NEAR VAN CHAUKI DISTRICT SIDHI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SHIVRAM SAKET S/O BHOLA PRASAD SAKET,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ITI GUEST
FACULTY TRADE (MATH / DRAWING) ITI SIDHI
DISTRICT SIDHI R/O VILLAGE AND POST
MAUGANJ, DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 4/1/2024
10:39:55 AM
2
(BY SHRI RAM BAHADUR KUSHWAHA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND SKILL
DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR SKILL DEVELOPMENT
D EPARTM EN T REGIONAL OFFICER BHOPAL
DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE DIRECTOR SKILL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTM ENT NEAR SAI MANDIR, NARMADA
ROAD JABALPUR DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRAINING INSTITUTE (ITI) NARMADAPURAM
DISTRICT NARMADAPURAM (HOSHANGABAD)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRAINING INSTITUTE (ITI) VIDISHA DISTRICT
VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRAINING INSTITUTE (ITI) SIDHI DISTRICT SIDHI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI S.S. CHAUHAN - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
Vishal Mishra passed the following:
ORDER
The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs :-
"(i) It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to call entire records, files of the proceeding for its kind perusal.
(ii) That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ commanding the respondents to give first preference to the petitioners for regular recruitment on the post of Training Officer Grade 3 and until the regular post is not filled up by the petitioners no fresh appointment on the post of Training Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 4/1/2024 10:39:55 AM 3 Officer Grade 3 be made, in the interest of justice.
(iii) That, it is therefore prayed before this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to award 4 bonus marks in each academic session on completion of every academic session and 20 bonus marks for experience of maximum 5 years in regular recruitment should be added/calculated in total obtained marks of Regular Training Officer Grade 3 recruitment.
(iv) That, it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ commanding the respondents that until regularization of Guest Faculty service of Guest Faculty should not be removed by any condition and equal pay should be provided for equal work till regularization, in the interest of justice.
(v) Any other reliefs which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the litigation may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioners."
2. The case of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Guest Faculty (Mehman Pravakta) and had been working since last many years in the Government Industrial Training Institute (ITI). An experience certificate in this regard was also issued to them.
3. It is their case that despite the fact that the petitioners are eligible to be appointed to the post of Regular Training Officer Grade 3, they have not been permitted to continue on the post of Guest Faculty. Placing reliance upon the order dated 26.04.2022 passed in WP No. 6159 of 2022 (Pradeep Kumar Yadav and others vs State of Madhya Pradesh and others) whereby this Hon'ble Court has held that the petitioners therein be continued as guest faculty teachers until and unless regular appointments are made, it is prayed that a similar relief be extended to the petitioners and they may also be directed to be continued as guest faculty till regular appointment is made.
4. Per contra, the counsel appearing for the respondents has vehemently opposed the contention stating that the law with respect to the Guest Faculty has been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as by the Division Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 4/1/2024 10:39:55 AM 4 Bench of this Court. A detailed order was passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Pradeep Kumar Yadav vs State of M.P. and others in WP No. 6159 of 2022 dated 26.04.2022 wherein it has been settled that there cannot be any replacement of Guest Faculty by another set of Guest Faculty. It is not the case of the petitioners that they are being replaced by another set of Guest Faculty, rather the period for which the petitioners were engaged as Guest Faculty is over. Hence, the reliefs as sought for cannot be granted.
5. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
6. The record indicates that the petitioners were inducted as Guest Faculty for a limited period. It is not a case of replacement of Guest Faculty by another set of Guest Faculty. Guest Faculties are contractual employees appointed for the academic session. The petitioners cannot claim continuation of services as a matter of right. They have to show that they have been replaced by another set of Guest Faculty which is not permissible in view of the judgment passed in the case of Saurabh Singh Baghel and others vs State of M.P. and others reported in 2019 (1) MPLJ 643 and in the case of Pradeep Kumar Yadav (supra) wherein it has been settled that there cannot be any replacement of a Guest Faculty by another set of a Guest Faculty. As, admittedly, there is no replacement in the matter, no relief can be extended to the petitioners. However, the petitioners may always participate in the selection process if any fresh advertisement is issued by the respondents for the working of Guest Faculty.
7. The writ petition sans merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 4/1/2024
10:39:55 AM
5
sj
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 4/1/2024
10:39:55 AM