LAWS(HPH)-2019-10-114

MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On October 15, 2019
MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Government of India evolved a Scheme called 'Ex-Servicemen Contributory Health Scheme' (hereinafter to be referred as 'Scheme'). The Scheme was evolved in order to provide health facilities to the families of the Ex-servicemen. A Notification was issued in January,2010 for making appointment to the various posts under the Scheme. As per the Scheme, reservation has been provided to the post of Paramedical staff to include Nurses, Nursing Assistants (General Radiographer, Physiotherapist), Dental Hygienist/Assistant and Lab Assistant. 70% posts have been reserved for Ex-servicemen and 30% for Civilians. The Notification further provides that in case the requisite number of Ex-servicemen is not available, then Civilians are to be appointed only for a period Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment of eleven months. As per the Notification, the petitioner submitted his application. He was selected and appointed as Lab Assistant in the year 2010 and worked as such till 2019. Thereafter, his services were discontinued. During the continuation of the services of the petitioner, the respondents issued a Notification calling for appointment to the said post. The said notice has been challenged before this Court.

(2.) The ground taken by the petitioner in this writ petition is that if the respondents are permitted to make appointment pursuant to the aforesaid Notification, there will be a situation of termination of the services of the petitioner. The continuation of the services of the petitioner for a quite long term confers right of continuation upon the petitioner. Accordingly, an interim order has been granted by this Court.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner has been appointed by a Selection Committee duly constituted by the respondents, the petitioner was interviewed along with other 32 candidates and the selection has been made on the basis of merit and other requirements, the question of creating a situation to terminate the services of the petitioner is arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. He also submitted that the very matter is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.36359 of 2016, in which an interim order has been granted, directing the respondents to maintain status quo, as on today, and further directing the respondents not to make any fresh appointments to the post(s) held by the petitioner(s) herein. The respondents issued the Notification, which is quite contrary to the interim order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hence, the Notification calling for appointment to the said post is required to be quashed and set aside.