RAHUL Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties. Petitioner was under contractual engagement pursuant to his appointment as Medical Officer by memo No. 1044 dated 18.6.2005 issued by the Chief Medical Officer at Primary Health Centre, Baliapur Dhanbad. It is not in dispute that petitioner's contractual engagement was not interrupted or came to a cessation either on the volition of the petitioner or at the instance of the employer. That is why the department included the name of the petitioner for consideration to the J.P.S.C. for regularization of services of such contractual Medical Officers based upon the conditions laid down in the Regularization Rules of 2011, Annexure-A notified on 12.8.2011. The name of the petitioner was also recommended by the respondent-J.P.S.C. as per Annexure-2 to the writ petition and also Annexures-B and D to the counter affidavit. It appears that for the district of Dhanbad petitioner's name was at serial No. 14 and in column 4 of the remarks, it was indicated that he is in continuous service. However, in bracket it is mentioned that as on making an application he was not present on the place of work from the period 1.10.2011 to 11.1.2012. Petitioner has, however, not been regularized in service despite such recommendation which is the reason for him to approach this Court seeking mandamus.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is being opposed by the respondent-State and J.P.S.C. on the ground that petitioner was in unauthorized absence for the said period which disentitles him for regularization in service in terms of Rule 4(Kha) of the 2011 Rules as also as per the conditions imposed at para 4 of the letter of Secretary, J.P.S.C. dated 6.5.2013, Annexure-B bearing No. 1239 addressed to the Principal Secretary of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare Depart-merit, Ranchi. The said letter indicates that recommendation has been made in respect of candidates but the department is required to verify as to whether the conditions of 5 years of continuity in service laid down in the Rules is fulfilled by the recommended candidates. Apart from that, another condition is that the department should also enquire as to whether the candidate has remained in unauthorized absence in his service period or not.

(3.) Petitioner in reply has stated that he had proceeded on medical leave after giving application to the Chief Medical Officer, Dhanbad. He also states that by memo No. 4 dated 16.1.2012 issued by the Additional Chief Medical Officer, Dhanbad it has been communicated that again he has been posted at his original place as Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Baliapur, Dhanbad from the place of his deputation under the District Epidemic Force by the order of Chief Medical Officer dated 14.9.2011. According to the petitioner he joined at Primary Health Centre, Baliapur, Dhanbad on 19.1.2012. Therefore, not only are the conditions of 2011 Rules requiring continuity in service for 5 years fulfilled by him but there is no interruption in his service, as such his period of leave should not be treated as interruption in service for the purpose of regularization when his name has already been recommended by the J.P.S.C. accepting that he has made an application for going on leave for the said period.