DR. SUSANTA KUMAR BEHERA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the petitioners pray for quashing the advertisement dated 23.06.2011 under Annexure-3 and for directing the opposite parties to continue the petitioners contractual employment as Clinical tutor till the vacancies are filled up by way of regular recruitment by the Orissa Public Service Commission (in short 'the OPSC').

(2.) Admittedly, the petitioners have acquired BDS degrees from recognised Institutions. In pursuance to the advertisement dated 08.05.2008 (Annexure-1) issued by the Government of Orissa, Department of Health and Family Welfare, the petitioners made applications, faced interview and being selected got appointed as Clinical Tutors for different subjects on contractual basis as per appointment orders dated 10.07.2008/26.11.2008 (Annexure-2 series). As per the appointment orders, the appointment is purely contractual in nature for a period of one year with consolidated pay of Rs. 15,000/- per month, extend able to three years or till the post is filled up by the OPSC on regular basis, whichever is earlier. It is also stipulated that the appointment is purely on temporary basis and terminable at any time without assigning any reason thereof. Admittedly, the petitioners' appointment was extended from year to year up to three years, which came to an end on 9th July, 2011 and thereafter. Shortly before the contractual engagement of the petitioners came to an end, opposite party No. 3 issued an advertisement on 23.06.2011 (Annexure-3) for filling up eight posts of Senior Resident/Clinical Tutor in different Disciplines at S.C.B. Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack. As per the advertisement, applications were invited from MDS/BDS Degree holders with a stipulation that the candidates with MDS qualification shall be given preference. It is also stipulated that the engagement will be on yearly basis for a maximum period of three years subject to satisfactory performance.

(3.) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that since the petitioners are continuing in the posts of Clinical Tutor, they should not be substituted by another set of contractual employees and that they should be permitted to continue in the post of Clinical Tutor till the OPSC makes recruitment on regular basis. It is further contended that if the authorities proposed to fill up the posts on contractual basis, there is no justification to disengage the present petitioners and again employ another new set of persons on contractual basis, as such action would be arbitrary and unreasonable. A further stand is taken by the petitioners in their rejoinder affidavit is that by virtue of Section 20 of the Dentists Act, 1948, the Dental Council of India have revised BDS Course Regulation, 2007 which envisages various guidelines and the procedure for filling up posts in the various disciplines of 'Dentistry'. Under the Regulations, the minimum staff pattern has been prescribed according to which, for under-graduate Dental studies for 50 Admissions, there shall be 30 Lecturers/Tutors out of which 25% shall be MDS and 75% BDS and, therefore, for 22 posts out of 30 the minimum qualification is BDS. It is submitted that since the S.C.B. Dental College and Hospital have decided to have student strength of 50, even if eight MDS candidates are taken, still 22 posts will be available for BDS candidates. It is also stated that due to non-compliance of the defects pointed out by the Dental Council of India for the year 2010-11 the student strength of,'the Institution was again reduced to 20, but thereafter the State Government took steps for compliance of defects, inter alia relating to appointment of adequate number of staff as required under the Regulations pointed out by the Dental Council of India. It is also stated that as against the required strength of 30 Lecturers/Tutors, there are only 10 out of which 7 are the present petitioners.