^ k-ffo1^^ IN THE HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.G.] WRIT PETITION (Sl N0. €-4^30F2009 PETITIONERS /^f .w^ ^^t r^,<(y V / vo ..•<tA ^ 8s' ^Aoy £•' ,' ^-' ^- ^ ^-ff ^" RESPONDENTS oc\ 1. Smt. Ammba Bai Dhruve, age 32 years W/o Shri Rarn Singh Dhruve, R/o. Village- Amanara, P.S. Borla Distt. Kabu-dham (C.G.) Posted at- Primary School Gadaghat. 2 Smt. Radha Bai Porte, age 40 years, W/o. Dev Singh Porte, R/o. VUlage- Kukrapani, P.S. Borla, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) Posted at- Primary School, Jampani 3 Smt. Rukhmani Sonwani age 30 years, W/o. Shri Budhram Sonwani, R/o. Kesmarda, Post Baijalpur, P.S. Borla Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) Posted at- Primary School, Khurripani 4 Smt. Runi Bai Uddey, age 34 years W/o. Dayal Singh Uddey, R/o. Village- Badanapani, Post Baijapur, P.S. Boria, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) Posted at- Primary School, Bhartpur. 5 Shri Dayal Singh Uddey, age 35 years, S/o. Shri Moti Singh Uddey, R/o. ViUage- Badanapani, Post Baijapur, P.S. Borla, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) Posted at- Priraary School, Badanapani 6 Shri Ram Singh Druve, age 30 years, S/o. Bajariram Druve, R/o. VUlage- Dhuma-Chhapar, Post Baijalpur, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) Posted at- F'rimary School, B.A. Larbakki The State of C.G. Through- Secretary Panchayat SE Gramin Vikas Vibhag D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Collector, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) 3. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Borla, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) 4 Distt. Education Officer, Janpad Panchayat Borla, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) VERSUS 1. ~'w! E) (Y "t WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ :t:M AF^. HIGH COTJRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRrr pETmoN (S} No. 5403 of2009 PETmONER; RESPONDENTS Smt. Ammba Bai Dhurve & Others. \rERSUS The State ofC.G. & Others. WRTTPETmCTLU/A 226 OF THE CONSTrTLTION OF TNDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satfsh K. Agmhotri. J. Present: Ms. Sotia Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer forthe State. ORDER fORAL^ (Passed on 22"dday of September, 2009) 1. The petitioners were initiaUv aopointed as Guruii in 1995 on honorarium of Rs. 500/- per month on temporary basis. It was mentioned in the appomtoent order itself that the appomtinent is purely temporary and ths sendces of fhe petitioners may be disengaged without aotice. Thereafler, the appointment of the petitioners continued by yearSy extension. Subsequentiy, on 25 Januar/, 2006 (Armexiire P/6), llie Chief Executive OfEcer, Janpad Panchayat, Bodla, Kabirdham, passed an order to remove the contract teachers including the petitioners on the sround tfaat they do not possess the required qualification. Tliereafter, it was decided by order dated 26 May, 2006 (,4.nnexure P/8) that the period of contract may be extended for two years to enable them to obtain necessary qualification of Higher Secondary School certificate. Tlie petitioners failed to obtain the requisite qualification within two years. L'ltimately, vide order dated 16 Jaiiuarv-, 2009 (Annexure P/10), it was ordered that on completion ofthe extended period, the services oftiie petitioners would come to aa end on the .(^,l!te •y ground that the petitioners failed to obtain necessary qualification ofHigher Secondarv School certificate. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the action ofthe respondents is against the principles of natural justice as the petitioners were aot afforded any opportunity of hearing before the impugned order was passed. Miss Sofiya Khan fiirther submits that the petitioners were appointed on temporary basis but this qualification was not prescribed at ths time pf appointment. Therefore, subsequently this condition cannot be inserted. Shri Bhaduri, leamed Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents 1 and 2 would submit fhat the petitioners were initially appointed oa honorarium for a period ofone year wherein it was specifically stated that their services ean be temiinated at any time, without notice. The petitioners were never appointed through aay selection process and the term ofthe petitioners was extended on yearly basis. In order to engage tlieir services on permanent basis, it vvas prescribed that the basic minimum qualification of Higher Secondary School Certificate must be obtained by the petitioners within a period oftwo vears. The same was also not done bv the petitioners. Heard leamed counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. Contentioa ofMiss Khan that the action ofthe respondents is violative of principles of natural justice, deserves to be rejected on simple ground fhat orice a pereon is appointed dehors the constitirtionai scheme of employment, the appointment itself is illesal. Adimttedly, tlie petitionere were appointed temporariiy on honorarium ofRs. 500/- per month aad their. sei-vices were extended time to time. Thus, the appointment of the petitioners .itself is against the constitutional scheme of employment. The «B 'o. 7. petitioners were afforded opportunity to acquire the tnmimum qualification ofHigher Secondary School Certificate within a period oftwo years. The petitioners failed to do so. Iftiie petitioners wanted to remain in service which the Govemmeat thousht ofkseping them on pennanent basis, they could have aequired necessary qualification in the extended period. No person can be appointed or allowed to continue on a post if he does not possess minimum qualification for the post. The petitioners cannot claim aiiy regularization, coatmuance or reinstatement in service on the basis of their appointment, which was temporai-v and not in accordance with iaw and dehors flie constitutional scheme of employment. (See U.P. Electricity Board Vs. Puran Chandra Pandey & Others , Indian Drugs & PhmTnaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Worhnen, Indian Drugs & Phannaceuticals Ltd. and State of U.P. and others Vs. DeshRaf). In view of the foregoing, and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the petition is dismissed. ___———— — —— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 1. (2007)AIRSCWS904 2. (2007) 1 SCC 408 3. (2007) 1 SCC 257