HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM : HON'BLE SHRt RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLESHRI L.C. BHADOO, J. Appellants/: (Respondents No. 1 TO 2) WritADpeal. No. 183 of 2007 1. 2. Versus State of Chhattisgaiti, Through : Secretary, Department of Health, D.K.S. Bhavan,Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) Chief Medicat & Health Officer, Korba, District - Korba (C.G.) Respondents/: 1. Ku. Jatro Bhagat, D/o- Late Shri Petitioners Bondiya Ram Bhagat, Aged about- 29 years, R/o- Village Tolma (Laiiunga), District-Raigarh, (C.G.) 2. Ku. Prabha Bhagat, D/o-Shri Bairangi Ram Bhagat, Aged about - 22 years, R/o - Dipika Colony, Gevra Project, Korba, District - Korba, (C.G.) 3. Ku. Yashoda Bhagat, D/o - Shri Balrangi Ram Bhagat, Aged about - 25 years, R/o - Dipika Colony, Korba, District - Korba, (C.G.) Writ Aopeal under Section 2 fi) of the Chhattisaarh Hlah Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006 Present : Shri Nshore Bhaduri, Additional Advocate General for the State / appellants. Shri Anand Kumar Tiwari, counsel for the respondents. sth Judament (13'"February,2008) The following judgment of the Court was passed by Rajeev 7 Gupta, C.J. Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admission. ^: 2) The appellants/State have flled this writ appeat against impugned order dated 18.04.2007 passed in Writ Petition (S) No.6050/2006. 3) The respondents had filed the writ petition for the following reliefs: 7.1) To kindly direct quash the impugned order dated 01.09.2006. 7.2) To kindly ailow the petitioners to continue in the services as per the appointment order dated 22.03.06. 7.3) To kindly pass any other relief as may be deemed just and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.4) To kindly allow the cost and expenses of the petition. 7.5) To kindly quash the termination order dated 7.10.2006 and grant salary to the petitioners for the period/months, which has been unpaid to them since September 2006. 4) The respondents/petitioners thus in substance were seeking quashing of the order dated 01.09.2006 whereby the petitioners were placed under suspenston on the ground that the petitioners have not undergone Auxiliary Nursing Midwife (ANM) Training for 18 months and the order dated 07.10.2006 whereby the appointment ofthe petitioners was also cancelled. 5) The writ petitioners were appointed as Multipurpose Health Workers for a period of one year vide order dated 22.03.2006 pursuant to the advertisement dated 26.09.2005. The petitioners were placed under suspension vlde order dated 01.09.2006 and ultimately were terminated frqm the services vide orderdated 07.10.2006. ^ padn-.a 6) The learned Single Judge finding that the requirement of 18 months ANM training was not prescribed as essentiai qualification in the advertisement quashed the- orders dated 01.09.2a36 & 07.10.2006 and directed payment of wages to the writ petitioners for the remaining period of the term of their appointment. 7) Shri Kishore Bhaduri, leamed Additional Advpcate Generat for the State / appellants could not dispute that in the advertisement dated 26.09.2005 the requirement of 18 months ANM training was not prescribed and as such, the writ petitioners could not have been placed under suspension and terminated for want of 18 months ANM training. 8) In this view of the matter, we do not flnd any inflmilty in the impugned order, which may warrant interference in this writ appeal. The writ appeal therefore is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily on merits notwithstanding that it is barred by time by 94 days. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge Jf rt