SBCWP861/1997 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.861/1997 Sanjeev Kumar Chaturvedi Vs. The Principal, Engineering College & Others Date of Order ::: 18.02.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Ankur Srivastava for Shri R.N. Mathur, Counsel for petitioner Shri S.D. Khaspuria, Additional Government Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- This writ petition was filed by petitioner Sanjeev Kumar Chaturvedi in the year 1997 challenging order dated 01.01.1997 by which his services were terminated on expiry of one month from that order. Learned counsel for petitioner has argued that petitioner was appointed as Lab Assistant in Engineer College Society of Kota by its Principal, on 01.11.1990; his service was however terminated by verbal order dated 10.01.1992. He challenged that order of his termination before this Court by filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3596/1992. This Court initially passed an interim order of stay but in that writ petition the respondents took a SBCWP861/1997 // 2 // stand that petitioner was appointed on contract basis, which stand was factually incorrect. Petitioner sought to rely on a certificate issued by Dr. S.N. Mathur, Head of Chemistry Department, Engineering College, Kota. Earlier writ petition was dismissed in default due to strike of lawyers and application filed for restoration thereof was also dismissed by the Court. The matter was therefore not decided on merits. Learned counsel submitted that subsequently petitioner was also called for interview on 27.11.1993 for the purpose of appointment on the post of Lab Attendant but, ignoring him, one M.K. Chaturvedi was appointed. Said M.K. Chaturvedi was closed relative of Shri Lalit Kishore Chaturvedi, the then Minister for Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan. This was undue favour extended to said M.K. Chaturvedi. Petitioner applied for appointment to the post of Lab Attendant also when respondent advertised 11 posts in January, 1991. Nine candidates were selected therein and respondent No.3 was at Serial No.1. Several juniors to petitioner were regularized in service. Name of such seven persons have been given by petitioner. Action of respondents was SBCWP861/1997 // 3 // violative of Articles 14 and 16 as well as Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is therefore prayed that writ petition may be allowed. Learned counsel for respondents opposed writ petition and submitted that when earlier writ petition of petitioner was dismissed by this Court and application for restoration thereof was also dismissed, another writ petition on same subject is not maintainable. The respondents have placed on record reply filed by them to earlier writ petition, wherein it has been contended that petitioner was appointed on contract basis. His contract came to an end in February, 1991. He was again assigned independent contract in the month of March upto 4th of August, 1991 and was paid for such period. He was never given any regular appointment. The contractual amount of Rs.35/- per day was agreed to be paid which the petitioner accepted. Respondent No.3 Satish Kumar Sharma was also engaged on contract basis. Even he was also seized to be in their employment after 30th of April, 1991. The selection of nine persons as Lab Attendant was made by duly constituted selection committee. It is denied that Shri M.K. Chaturvedi was SBCWP861/1997 // 4 // selected as Lab Attendant due to his alleged relationship with the then Minister for Higher Education of the Government of Rajasthan, Shri Lalit Kishore Chaturvedi. Petitioner has not impleaded Shri Lalit Kishore Chaturvedi as party to writ petition, therefore, allegation of mala-fide should be rejected. Originally in earlier writ petition filed by petitioner ex- parte order of stay was passed and, therefore, petitioner continued in service. When earlier writ petition as well as application for restoration thereof came to be rejected, specific order dated 01.01.1997 was passed thereby discontinuing services of petitioner and in that order also, he was given notice of one month and in that sense that termination came into effect on 01.02.1997. The writ petition be therefore dismissed. I have given my anxious consideration to rival submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and perused material on record. Petitioner has not been able to show that he was appointed on regular basis or that his appointment was made through acceptable mode of recruitment. He was picked up for being appointed and his appointment was described as contractual in nature. Such appointment was SBCWP861/1997 // 5 // accepted by petitioner and he worked under the conditions prescribed therefor. The respondents discontinued him from service from 04.08.1991. He was subsequently allowed to continue in service for some time on account of interim order passed by this Court. Once the interim order came to an end, the order dated 01.01.1997, which is impugned in present writ petition, was passed. More than 13 years have gone by since then. Keeping in view the nature of appointment of petitioner and period for which he worked, ignoring period of his working on account of interim order of stay of this Court, it cannot be said that petitioner had acquired any right to hold the post in question. He faced selection for the post of Lab Attendant and on account of his merit he was not selected, that cannot be a reason to hold the selection bad. Another question is that petitioner has not challenged the selection of those others who were eventually appointed as Lab Attendant in that selection. The allegation of mala-fide regarding appointment of M.K. Chaturvedi on account of his alleged relationship with the then Higher Education Minister of the State of Rajasthan Shri Lalit SBCWP861/1997 // 6 // Kishore Chaturvedi, cannot be accepted as the petitioner has not impleaded Shri Lalit Kishore Chaturvedi as party to the writ petition. I therefore do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is dismissed. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//