Kamlesh Kumar Netam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISARG

BILASPUR w.P. No.

1{@??'

Ios PETITIONER Kamlesh Kumar Netam aged 25 yearsr'

S/o Shri Prabhuram Netam Bhagidari Shikchhak Amlidih Middle School Amlidih, R/o At. and Post-Taraud Tah.

Balod District- Durg (C.G.)

VERSUS

:

RESPONDENT :

1The State Govt.

of Chhattisgarh"

Through- The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S.

Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) Block Education Officem VDurg'(C.G.) 3President, / Janghagidari Shikash Samiti Middle School, Kherthadih, Tehsii - Balod, District - Durg (C.G.)'

4Janpad Panchayat, / Through - Cheif Executive Officer Tehsil ~ Baiod, District - Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARI PROHIBITION AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS, ORDER OR ORDERS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS.

a1 HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISQARH : BILASPUR W.P. (S) No.4077 of 2006 PETITIONER Kamlesh Kumar Netam RESPONQENTS The State of Chhattisgarh & others Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Present :- Shn' Barun Chakrabartey, counsel for the petitioner. Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 1S'day of January, 2014) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

1.

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking regularization on the post of Assistant Teacher in Janbhagidari School from the date of appointment. and further to prohibit the respondent from terminating his services and making fresh appointment of teachers in School where petitioner was working as Assistant Teacher.

indisputably, similar writ petitions bearing W.P.

No.2841/2006 (Shaskiya Unnayan Shala Shikshak Sang, Chhattisgarh & another v.

of Chhattisgarh and another? and other connected matters have been dismissed by this Court on 05.12.2013. Since present writ petition has raised similar issues, it is also dismissed in the same terms. A copy of the order passed in W.P. No.2841/2006 & other connected matters be placed on the record '_ Sd/lof this writ petition.

i Prashant Kumar Mishra i Judge

/,7Q HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILSPUR W.P. No. 5092 of 2006 Gurucharan Sahu and another.

PETITIONERS State of Chhattisgarh and others.

x RESPONDENTS W.P. No.2397 of 2006 Jan-Bhagidari Shikshak Sangh Dhamtari PETITIONERS Unit and others State of Chhattisgarh and others.

RESPONDENTS W.P. No. 2818 of 2006 Ankur Ram Baghei.

PETlTl0NER State of Chhattisgarh and others.

RESPONDENTS '

W.P. No.2841 of 2006 Shashkiya Unnayan Shala Shikshak PETITIONERS Sangh, Chhattisgarh and another.

The State of Chhattisgarh and another.

RESPONDENTS W.P. No. 3675 of 2006 SR. Sahu and others.

PETITIONERS o f Chhattisgarh and others.

RESPONDENTS W.P. No. 5720 of 2006 h Budheshwar Lal Dewangan and oters.

PETITIONERS

RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh and others.

AND 4N W.P. No. 5748 of 2006 PETITIONERS Santosh Kumar Bairagi and others.

RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh and others.

Shri Awadh Tripathi.

Shri D.N.

Prajapati, counse! for the respective Shri Y.S. Thakur, Dy. Advocate Genera! with Shri Rakesh Jha, Govt." petitioners.

Advocate for the State.

SINGLE BENCH ORAL ORDER (05/1 2/201 3) Petitioners have preferred these writ petitions for direction to the respondents to appoint them or the members of the petitioner-Association who are working as Jan Bhagidari Shikshak as Shiksha Karmi of different grades as per their qualification. They have also prayed for issuance of direction to the State Government not to upgrade/promote the Primary, Middle and High Schools as the-Govt. Middle, High and Higher Secondary Schools with further prayer to not to discontinue the services of the Jan Bhagidari Teachers in the garb of re-upgradation of the schools. v x 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner ts re'

H M i were appointed as Jan Bhagidari Teachers by the respective school whe they worked for a substantial length of time and in due course some of the Schools were also upgraded.

however, after a policy decision taken by the State Govt, the Jan Bhagidari Schools were again sought to be upgraded as Govt.

Middle, High Higher Secondary School, State Govt.

or the respective, Panchayats a're making fresh appointments of Shiksha Karmis ignoring the just and lawful claim of the petitioners. According to teamed counsel for the petitioners, since they

continued as Jan Bhagidari Teachers and later on the Schools have been re-upgraded by thel have legitimate expectation of continuation of service and their discontinuance or non-consideration for absorption as Shiksha Karmi amounts to violation of principles enshrined in Article of the Constitution of India.

According to them petitioners were selected by the concerned Jan Bhagidari Samiti pursuant to a selection process, therefore, they cannot be treated as backdoor entrant, therefore, when the Schools were upgraded and taken over by the Govt. the respondents should have taken over/absorbed the services of the petitioners.

3.

Per contra, learned Deputy Advocate General would submit that the State Govt. has not framed any Rules under Article 309 of Constitution of India nor any administrative instructions or guidelines having the force of law has been issued for appointment of'the Jan Bhagidari Teachers. He would submit that each of the Jan Bhagidari Teacher was appointed at local level by the Jan Bhagidari Samiti which is not a legal entity, therefore petitioners have no right of continuance on the post. 4.

On perusal of the papers annexed with the writ petitions, it would appear that Jan Bhagidari Teachers have been appointed at the Panchayat Level Jan Bhagidari Shiksha Samiti and for making such appointment State Govt. has neither enacted any Rules under Article 309 of the Constitution nor any executive instruction has been issued.

It appears in year 2002-03 the State Govt.

permitted arrangement of Teachers at the local level by Samiti, however, no further instruction was issued as to the manner of appointment or the procedure to be followed for Vmaking arrangement.

Teachers so appointed 'were paid honorarium and their appointment was for a particular Academic Session

__[_t-'

which was extended for further Academic Session in some cases. When the State Govt.

decided to upgrade the Schools regular Teachers were appointed services of petitioners were automaticaliy discontinued.

\ 5.

lndisputabiy, petitioners have not been appointed by the State Govt. or any Panchayat.

Their appointments have been made by v Samiti at Iocal'

levei.

Some of appointment ordeis'i.

annexed with the writ petitions would reveal that the appointment is not '

made under any Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of in or any other statutory scheme. The argument that the petitioners have legitimate expectation of their continuance in the service is without any substance because there was no promise by or any instrumentalities of at any point of time regarding their continuance or absorption as Teachers. Moreover, their initial appointment was not made under any constitutional scheme. 6.

In matter of Secretary/State of Karnataka and others Vs.

Umadevi (3) & others {(2006) 4 SCC 1}, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that writ Court cannot direct regularization or absorption of any daily wage or adhoc or temporary employee.

7.

Petitioners have failed to demonstrate violation of any constitutional or statutory right.

8.

Thus, the writ petitions being bereft of any substance it deserves to be and are hereby dismissed, however, the dismissal of the writ petition would not come in the way of the respondents, if they desire to take up the representation filed by the petitioners.

SdlPrashant Kumar Mishr a 3 '

Judge ,