DEEPAK KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since identical questions of facts and law are involved in these petitions, therefore with consent of the parties, these writ petitions have been heard finally and are being decided by the present order.

(2.) On the request made by the parties, the facts have been noticed from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6232/2019 and the prayer made therein reads as under:-

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the Government of India introduced a scheme namely DEENDAYALANTYODAYAYOJNA-NATIONAL URBAN LIVELIHOOD MISSION (DAY-NULM) (hereinafter to be referred as the "Scheme") for the purpose of reducing poverty and vulnerability of the urban poor households by enabling them to get the gainful self employment and skilled wage employment opportunities, ultimately resulting in appreciable improvement in their livelihoods on sustainable basis through building grass route level institutions of the poor by tendering process. The scheme started in the year 2014-2015 and has been decided to be funded 60% by the Central Government and 40% by the State Government. Implementing the said scheme in the State of Rajasthan, the respondents invited bids from the placement agencies to provide manpower of various posts. In the case of the petitioners, the placement agency namely T and M Services Consulting Private Limited Mumbai (hereinafter to be referred as the "placement agency") was engaged by the respondents for providing manpower at the State Level as well as at the District Level. The said placement agency issued the advertisement for hiring the persons on various posts i.e. State Manager, District Manager and Community Organizer, on contract basis. The petitioners pursuant to the advertisement issued by the placement agency applied for appointment on the respective posts and after consideration, the petitioners were given offer of appointment on the respective posts by the placement agency. Initially, the process was started in the year 2015 and the petitioners were engaged on contract basis on the respective posts by the placement agency initially for a period of one year and their term on contract basis was extended further from time to time. It has also come on record that taking into consideration the achievement of 100% of targets allocated under the said scheme, the term of said placement agency was accordingly extended by the State Government, thereafter the term of said placement agency was ultimately terminated on 15/6/2019. After the termination, a new tender was floated in which the placement agency namely B.S.A. Corporation, Pune was selected, which entered into a contract with the State Government for the purpose of providing manpower on various posts. Thus, a perusal of the factual matrix shows that the State Government entered into a contract with the placement agency for manpower and the placement agency invited applications for appointment on various posts on contract basis and after consideration, the persons like the petitioners were given appointment, as such it is clear that the petitioners' appointments was contractual, made by the placement agency, their salary/remuneration was also paid by the placement agency and therefore the petitioners are not either contractual or regular employees of the State Government in any manner.