DHARMENDRA JAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions involving similar controversy are being disposed of by this common order, however, the facts are illustratively taken of SBCWP No.2351/2014- Dharmendra Jain & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., in which the respondent State has filed a reply also.

(2.) The petitioners were working in various positions in the National Rural Health Mission Scheme ('NRHM', for short) like Data Entry Operator, Asha-Supervisor, Accountant, Nurse Grade II, Ayush Doctor etc. The petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 05.06.2013 of the Medical & Health Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur, by which they were informed that in the Central Government Scheme, NRHM, the Budget approval for their fixed monthly honorarium was to a lesser extent than what was being paid to them and, therefore, the excess amount of monthly honorarium paid to them under the Agreement of their employment, was ordered to be recovered back and henceforth only approved Budget amount would be paid to them as monthly fixed honorarium.

(3.) The petitioners have approached this Court for quashing of that order dated 05.06.2013 and, inter-alia, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended before this Court that the increase of 10% in the fixed monthly honorarium per year was envisaged in the agreement executed for their contractual employment, revisable on yearly basis, and the same was done by the competent authorities of the respondent, Medical & Health Department, like the Chief Medical & Health Officer and consequently while approving the Budget for such Programme Implementation Plan (PIP) for the year 2013-14, the Central Government and the State Government ought to have taken into account the payment of fixed monthly honorarium already being paid to the petitioners was more than the Budget approvals; and consequently the Budget accordingly should have been increased for these positions.