1 W.P No.9272/2010(S) HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR WRIT PETITION NO.9272/2010 (S) PETITIONER : ASHISH KHARE Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.8336/2010 (S) PETITIONERS : LAXMI PRASAD DUBEY AND OTHERS Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.10800/2010 (S) PETITIONER : PRAMOD KUMAR SANDIYA Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. _______________________________________________________ WRIT PETITION NO.10931/2010 (S) PETITIONERS : SHIRISH PATHAK AND ANOTHER Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.11326/2010 (S) PETITIONER : NADARIYA SHARMA Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS 2 W.P No.9272/2010(S) WRIT PETITION NO.11339/2010 (S) PETITIONER : DHEERAJ KUMAR JOSHI Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.14424/2010 (S) PETITIONER : MOHAN LAL AHIRWAR Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.15453/2010 (S) PETITIONER : RANJIT SINGH BHALAVI Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.15625/2010 (S) PETITIONER : RAKESH CHOUDHARY Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.17384/2010 (S) PETITIONERS : SHYAM SOLANKI Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.17385/2010 (S) PETITIONER : JEEVAN MORE Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. 3 W.P No.9272/2010(S) WRIT PETITION NO.18447/2010 (S) PETITIONER : MUKESH CHOUHAN Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.288/2011 (S) PETITIONER : JOHAR SINGH PARMAR Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.296/2011 (S) PETITIONERS : SUDEEP TIWARI AND OTHERS Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.302/2011 (S) PETITIONER : NISHIKANT Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.2319/2011 (S) PETITIONER : HIMMAT SINGH GURJAR Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.2555/2011 (S) PETITIONER : PRADEEP KUMAR AHIRWAR Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. 4 W.P No.9272/2010(S) WRIT PETITION NO.6034/2011 (S) PETITIONER : VIKRAM SINGH Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.8421/2011 (S) PETITIONER : RAM SINGH DAWAR Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.7259/2010 (S) PETITIONER : RAJEEV NARAYAN SHUKLA AND OTHERS Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.7880/2010 (S) PETITIONER : BRIJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.7258/2010 (S) PETITIONERS : SHIVAKANT UPADHYAYA AND ANOTHER Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. WRIT PETITION NO.90/2011 (S) PETITIONER : AKHILESH KUMAR SONI Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. 5 W.P No.9272/2010(S) WRIT PETITION NO.9464/2011 (S) PETITIONER : ROHIT KUMAR DESHMUKH Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. CONTEMPT PETITION NO.557/2011 PETITIONER : HIMMAT SINGH GURJAR Vs. RESPONDENT : DR. SHARAD PANDIT CONTEMPT PETITION NO.804/201 PETITIONER : SHYAM SOLANKI Vs. RESPONDENTS : DR. VIRAJ BHALKE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice R.S. Jha. For the petitioners : Shri R. K. Nanhoria, Shri Sidharth Gupta, Shri Shakti Prakash Pandey, Shri Rajnish Choubey, Shri Atulanand Awasthy, Advocates For respondents : Shri S. M. Lal, Govt. Advocate, Shri Chandra Mallik, Advocate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- O R D E R (27/08/2011) This order shall govern the disposal of the aforesaid petitions as they involve similar issues and as such are being heard and decided analogously by this common order. 2. The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present petition, are that the petitioners, who are engaged on contract basis as Male Counselor/Feeding Demonstrator in Nutrition Rehabilitation Centres 6 W.P No.9272/2010(S) established under the National Rural Health Mission, have filed these petitions against the orders of different dates by which they have been disengaged on the ground that henceforth the State would engage only Female Counselor/Feeding Demonstrator. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the aforesaid act of the respondents is violative of Article 15 of the Constitution of India and is also discriminatory and arbitrary inasmuch as the State now proposes to reserve 100% posts under the aforesaid Scheme for women candidates and, therefore, the impugned orders and decision of the State be quashed. The learned counsel for the petitioners have relied upon the decision passed by the Gwalior Bench of this Court in Hemant Nagar & Others vs. State of M.P & Ors., (W.P No.2945/2011 (S)) and that of the Indore Bench in the case of Sajid Khan & Ors vs. State of M.P. & Ors., (W.P No.10550/2010, wherein advertisement issued by the State authorities proposing to fill up the aforesaid posts by making 100% reservation for women have been quashed. 4. It is also pointed out that subsequently the State has also issued a policy decision dated 15.4.2011 which was assailed before this Court in W.P Nos.13042/2011(S), 13044/2011(S) and 13048/2011(S) which have been disposed of by order dated 26.8.2011 with a direction to the State authorities to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners' therein in the light of the decision of the Gwalior and Indore Benches of this Court and in such circumstances similar orders in the present petition be passed. 7 W.P No.9272/2010(S) 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that though the petitioners are regularly performing their duties on their posts in view of the interim orders passed by this Court, they have not been paid salary and in some cases are not being permitted to work on the post and in such circumstances the respondent authorities be directed to pay the dues relating to the salary of the petitioners expeditiously. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent/State, per contra, submits that the State looking to the fact that the aforesaid National Rural Health Mission requires interaction with women residing in rural areas who are extremely reluctant to interact with male employees, have taken a decision to engage only Female Counselor/Feeding Demonstrator and in the light of the aforesaid decision have discontinued the petitioners. 7. Be that as it may, in view of the fact that this Court has already disposed of W.P Nos.13042/2011(S), 13044/2011(S) and 13048/2011(S), with a direction to the State to consider and decide the petitioner's representation keeping in mind the decision of the Gwalior and Indore Benches of this Court, the present petitions are also disposed of with a similar direction to the effect that in case the petitioners file representations before the concerned authority within four weeks from the date of obtaining a certified copy of the order passed today alongwith the decisions of the Gwalior and Indore Benches and other decisions of this Court, the concerned authority shall consider and take a decision thereon in the light of and keeping in mind the decisions of this Court in accordance with law. 8 W.P No.9272/2010(S) 8. It is further directed that in the meanwhile, till decision on the petitioners' representation they shall be permitted to continue on their respective posts and salary including arrears thereof shall be paid to them by the concerned authority after determining the same as far as possible within a period of three months from the date of furnishing a copy of the order passed today to the said authority. 9. The petitions are, accordingly, disposed of with the direction/observation as aforesaid. 10. In the facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to the costs. A copy of this order be placed in the record of connected petitions. ( R. S. JHA ) J U D G E 27/08/2011 mms/-