BIBHUTI KUSHWAHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bibhuti Kushwaha and six others are before this Court for quashing of the order dated 21.2.2017 issued by the Under Secretary of the State of U.P. along with the order dated 22.2.2017 issued by the Additional Commissioner, MGNREGA, Gram Vikas, U.P. informing the petitioners that the period of their functioning as Ombudsman has come to an end on 5.2.2017 and, accordingly, concerned District Magistrates should proceed to fill up the vacancies of Ombudsman in respect of their district.

(2.) Brief background of the case is that each one of the petitioner has been performing and discharging their duties as Ombudsman in different districts of State of U.P. To understand the agony of the petitioners, we proceed to examine and trace the history that contains the origin to the post of Ombudsman in the State of U.P. The Constitution of the country in 7th Schedule exercising the power as conferred under Art. 246 of the Constitution of India has prescribed list under three heading i.e. List I (Union List), List II (State List) and List III (Concurrent List). Art. 246 deals with the 'subject matter of laws made by Parliament and by the Legislatures of States'. Since the subject of welfare of labour comes within the heading of Concurrent List i.e. List III, wherein the power is entrusted to both the Parliament and State Legislature to form the laws. To achieve the object as being given in the Concurrent List an Act came into picture bearing nomenclature as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act 2005"). The assent of the said Act was obtained by the President on 5.9.2005 and the same was published on 7.9.2005. The statement and object of the Act 2005 was given herein below:

(3.) Sec. 27 of the 2005 Act empowers the Central Government to give such directions as it may consider necessary to the State Government for the effective implementation of the provisions of this Act, for ready reference same is as follows: