ASHA JOSHI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are claiming following relief :

(2.) From the relief claimed and the averments made in the petition, it reveals that the petitioners are mainly aggrieved with the action of respondent No.4 whereby the respondent No.1 has been asked to make a fact finding enquiry in respect of the complaint made against the petitioners and that was attached with the letter which is impugned in this petition and to submit the report in that regard till 13/10/2023.

(3.) Shri Ajay Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners has contended that the petitioners are not the government employees and they do not come within the purview of 'public servant' and as such, respondent No.4 has no jurisdiction to register any case against the petitioners. He has further contended that any enquiry and action by respondent No.4 with regard to ascertaining any complaint made against the petitioners is without jurisdiction. He has contended that respondent No.4 cannot entertain the said complaint nor register any case for making an enquiry in respect thereof and as such, the action taken by respondent No.4 asking any information of the petitioners on account of letter dtd. 8/8/2022 (Annexure-P/3) is required to be quashed. Shri Gupta has also contended that as per Sec. 7 of the M.P. Lokayukt Evam Up-lokayukt Adhiniyam, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Adhiniyam, 1981'), respondent No.4/organization has been confined and bound to make an enquiry only against public servant and according to him, the public servant has been defined in a definition clause of the Adhiniyam, 1981 under Sec. 2(g), and the petitioners according to him do not fall under the said definition, therefore, the action of respondent No.4 in entertaining the complaint made to them is liable to be set aside.