LAWS(DLH)-2013-1-123

SECRETARY HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT Vs. LOK NAYAK HOSPITAL PARA MEDICAL & TECHNICAL UNION

Decided On January 10, 2013
Secretary Health And Family Welfare Department Appellant
V/S
Lok Nayak Hospital Para Medical & Technical Union Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PERTAINING to W.P.(C) No.6668/2012 we find that none appears for the respondent No.1 in spite of service being effected and the matter being passed over once. As regards respondent No.2, we find that he was a co- applicant in O.A.No.2816/2011. With reference to the pleadings in the Original Application we find that for what reason he was impleaded as an applicant No.2 has not been brought out, but it appears to be case where he joined as a co-applicant being either a member or an office bearer of the Union.

(2.) FROM the facts we would be noting hereinafter it would be revealed that respondent No.1, the Employees Union of Para Medical and Technical Employees serving in Lok Nayak Hospital initiated an action bringing to the notice of the Central Administrative Tribunal that the proposed recruitment process set into motion by respondent No.3 (DSSSB) to fill up vacancies to the post of Junior Radiographers and Senior Radiographers in Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Hospital was in violation of the law. No personal relief was claimed by applicant No.2, and thus notwithstanding applicant No.2, impleaded as respondent No.2 in the writ petition not being served, the matter can proceed for disposal.

(3.) O .A.No.2816/2011 was filed by Lok Nayak Hospital Para Medical and Technical Employees Union and its member Raj Kumar Goel. Three respondents, the Chief Secretary, Delhi Secretariat, the Secretary, Principal Health, Delhi Secretariat and the Chairman, Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board were impleaded as respondents. We would like to comment here that the Memo of Parties drawn up in the Original Application is completely wrong. Appointments were being made by the Health Department of the Government of N.C.T. Delhi for a Hospital established by the Government and thus the respondent had to be the Government of N.C.T. Delhi to be sued through its Chief Secretary. We are surprised that respondent No.1 was the Chief Secretary, Delhi Secretariat a post which does not exist. We clarify that there is no post of Chief Secretary in Delhi Secretariat. The second respondent impleaded is the Secretary, Principal Health, Delhi Secretariat. No such post exists. The post is that of the Principal Secretary (Health), Government of N.C.T. Delhi.