HI§H CQUR! OF CH ATT!SG&EH M BLASPUR W, P.§ 8! No. 6050 0f 2006 Pefitioners Ku. Jatro Bhagat. Slo Late Shfi Bondiya Ram Bhagat, aged about 29 years. esédent of Vinage Tolma (Laiiunga), Disirict — Raigarh (C.G.). Ku. Prabha Bhagat; Dlo Shri Eairangi Ram Bhagat, aged about 22 yams. resident cf Dipika Coiony, Gevra Project, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) Ku. Yashoda Bhagat, D/c Shri Bairangi Ram Ehagai, aged about 25 years. resident cf Dipika Coiony, Korba, Eistrict Korba ($6.) State of Chhattiagarh‘ thraugh 5:. Respandents Secretary, Department of Heaitn D K S. Bhawa Mantralaya Raipur (6G,). Chief Medica! 8'. Hea!th OftTGer. Kcrba, District Katha {c.G.) ! PE’T'W?‘ UN'EF £RT'$L§§_ZeS “F Tt‘E CO$TiTUTl§N §F mam $3: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri Shri A. K. Tiwari, Acivocate for the petitioners. Shri V. V. S. Mu'ti‘y Depu‘y Advoc*te General with Miss Deepaii Pandey, Panei Lawyer wr me respcndent“ ¢RDER (Passed on this 18 h uay of Aprii, 2m?) 1. The petiticners. by this petitian. have impugned the crder dated 19““; mmmxure P/4X whereunder the petiticners were at the petitioners have not obtained A fa M (AU"'itary 1idwifery Course for one year. and the crder dated 7 10 2006 (Annexure Ri") whe eby the appomtment of the petitieners we suspended eh the gteund Wing Midwsfe) training .0r 18 'ncntt‘e aed they have Obtained Para—Medicai @9 2. The indisputable facts §n mmhel! are that the petitianers were appsinted vide order dated 22.3.2006 (Annexure P12) as Mumpurpose Health Women pufsuant to the advertisement dated 26.9.2005 (Annexufe PH). inviting applications fiom all eligible candidatee. The appointment of the petitioners was for a pel'iod of one yeai. in the meantime. the services of the petitioners wefe placed under suspension vide order dated 1.9.2006 and thereafter vide order dated 7.10.2006 they were terminated from service. The petitioners have challenged the said orders in this netition. . Shri Anand Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner‘ would submit that the agreement as welt as terms and conditions of the advertisement, does not provide for A.N.M. training for 18 months and the petitioners have submitted the required raining certificate. The minimum qualification as required. according to the advertisement was‘ Higher Secondary or 10+2 with Family Health Worker Training Certificate, The appointment letter also does not indicate that the petitioners were required to submit certificate for A.N.M. training for a period of 18 months. Thus. the impugned order dated 1.9.2006 and 7.10.2006 are contrary to the terms and conditions of the advertisement and appointment order. The same deserves to he quashed on the ground of violation of the principles of naturaliustice aiso. . Shri V. V. S. Murty. learned Deputy Advocate General with Miss Deepali Pandey. Panel Lawyen appearing for the respondents. per contra‘ would submit that the State Level Review Meeting. held on 22.8.2006 had decided to have A.N.M. training for 18 months for appointment of Multipurpose Health Worker. The petitioners do not possess the required training certificate, thus, the impu ned orders passed are just and proper. @ 5. Having heard teamed oouneei for the parties and having perused the dccuments aapended ta the §etitkm and feturn. it is evident that the State Level Review Meeting took place 0n 22.8.2906. after five months {om the date 0f appointment i.e. 23.2.2006. Any decieien taken in the meeting dated 223.20% cannot be made appiicabie retrospectively to those empieyees. wna have been appetnted in accordance with the advertisement and en terms and conditions as specified in the appointment order. . Admitte iv. there was no requirement of A.N.M. Training Certificate for 18 months in the advertisement and the appointment of the petitioners were aiso made after proper seiecticn, pursuant to the open invitation made in the advertisement. Thus. the impugned orders dated 1.9.2005 and 7.19.2006, which have been passed without any basis or any iegai authority, deserve to be quashed. . As a resuit, in View of the reasons mentioned herein above. the petitioners are entitied to complete the period of appointment. Since the period of time of the appointment hae been over during the pendenoy of this case, the petitioners are entitied to consequentiai reiiets of hack wages for the said period. The petition is acoordingiy aiiowed. Thekur Sdl- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge