IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 8TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 8084 of 2009(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- BEENA GEORGE, W/O.VARKEY JOSEPH, BLOCK AROGYA KERALAM CO-ORDINATOR NILAMBUR, CHUNGATHARA BLOCK,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY MR.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, MR.S.SUJIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME MANAGER, AROGYA KERALAM,MALAPPURAM AROGYA KERALAM NATAIONAL RURAL HEALTH MISSION WOODBIN COMPLEX, COURT ROAD,MANJERI. 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SOCIETY, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE STATE MISSION DIRECTOR (NRHM) AROGYA KERALAM STATE PROGRAMME MONITORING AND SUPPORT UNIT DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH SERVICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. DR.BABURAJ,DISTRICT PROGRAMME MANAGER, AROGYA KERALAM,CIVIL STATION,KOZHIKODE. *ADDL.R5 TO R10 ARE IMPLEADED: R5. RAMLATH K.(ASHA CODE NO.MLPM (R) 06-09-034 NILAMBUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT) PATHOORAN HOUSE, MUKATTA, NILAMBUR - 679 380. Kss ..2/- ...2..... WPC.NO.8084/2009 E R6. LISSY RAJU, (ASHA CODE NO.MLPM (R) 06-02-127, CHALIYAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT) PERINCHERIMANNIL HOUSE, ERNHIMANGAD P.O., MYLADI, CHALIYAR. R7. FASEELA SHEREEF, (ASHA CODE NO.MLPM (R) 0-04-076) KARIPAYI, CHUNGATHARA, PIN - 679 334. R8. P.SEENATH, (ASHA CODE NO.MLPM (R) 06-04-178, CHUNGATHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT) PAZHUMKATTIL HOUSE, KARUMBALANYODE POST, CHUNGATHARA - 679 334. R9. FATHIMA SALEEM, (ASHA CODE NO.MLPM (R) 06-07-016, KARULAI GRAMA PANCHAYAT) ATHIKKAL HOUSE, KOTTAPURA, KARULAI P.O. 679 344. R10. LISY THOMAS, (ASHA CODE NO.MLPM (R), 06-05-102, EDAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT) KUNNUVILA HOUSE, BANGLAVE KUNNU, ELAKKARA POST, PIN - 679 331. (*ADDL.R5 TO R10 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD.6/07/09 IN I.A.NO.6610/09) R1 BY ADV. MR.M.AJAY,SC,NATIONAL RURAL HEALTH MISSION R5 TO R10 SRI.K.RAMESH FOR ADDLR5 TO R10 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.8084/2009 E APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD. 6/12/2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ASSIGNED TO THE PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF THE BILLDTD.22/08/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR REIMBURSEMENT. P4: COPY OF THE BILL DTD. 4/09/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR REIMBURSEMENT. P5: COPY OF THE MEMO DTD. 20/10/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P6: COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE MEMO, DTD. 28/10/2008 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P7: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF ENQUIRY OFFICER DTD.25/11/2008. P8: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE MEDICAL OFFICER DTD. 1/11/2008 TO THE ENQUIRY OFFICER. P9: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE BLOCK PANCHAYATH PRESIDENT TO THE ENQUIRY OFFICER. P10: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PANCHAYATH PRESIDENTS TO THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P11: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.NRHM/SPM(A&T)/5680/2008 DTD.28/02/2009 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P12: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT MADE BY THE PETITIONER AND FORWARDED TO THE BLOCK PANCHAYAT PRESIDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R3(A): COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 21/11/08. R3(B): COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT. R3(C): COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT NO.NRHM - SPM RCH, ADMN & TRG NRHM/6164/2008/SPMSU DTD.20/01/09 TO THE PETITIONER. R3(D): COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 31/01/09. R3(E): COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF THE PETITIONER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ Kss P.A.TO JUDGE V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 8084 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 30th September,2009 J U D G M E N T By Ext.P1, petitioner was appointed as Block Arogyakeralam Coordinator under the National Rural Health Mission and under the same order, she was allocated to Chungathara Block in Malappuram District. By Ext.P5, she was asked to show cause why action should not be taken on the allegation that she has misbehaved with superior officers as also other employees in the office. She submitted Ext.P6 representation denying the allegation. By Ext.R3 (a), the District Programme Manager, Malappuram, petitioner's superior, after conducting a preliminary enquiry, reported the matter to the State Mission Director and requested him to replace the petitioner and allot a new person as Block Coordinator. By Ext.P7 which apparently was after the State Mission Director took note of Ext. R3 (a), the District Programme Manager , Kozhikode, was required to conduct a a detailed W.P ( C) No. 8084 of 2009 2 enquiry. Such an enquiry was conducted and Ext. R3 (b) report was submitted before the State Mission Director. Petitioner was issued a notice to show cause as to why stern disciplinary action should not be taken against her for insubordination and by Ext. R3 (d) she gave a reply as well. By Ext.P11 order, her services were terminated. This has been challenged in the writ petition. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent. 3. Heard Sri. N.N.Sugunapalan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri. M.Ajay, learned counsel for the National Rural Health Mission. 4. I do not propose to go into the merits of the contention raised by the petitioner as to the validity of the enquiry. 5. I take note of the fact that appointment of the petitioner is on a contract basis. Rules regulating disciplinary action against persons borne on regular service, therefore, do not apply to the case of the petitioner. Moreover, the National Rural Health Mission W.P ( C) No. 8084 of 2009 3 stands outside the purview of civil service. 6. I am of the view that an order terminating the services of the petitioner, irrespective of the fact that it was on a contract basis should have been passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. An officer of the stature of State Mission Director should inter alia, be in a position to better appreciate the points in issue on a personal hearing of the delinquent official. Ext.P11 shall be treated as a show cause notice and petitioner shall be heard on the question as to why her services, as Block Arogyakeralam Cor-ordinator on a contract basis should not be terminated. 7. Petitioner shall file a fresh representation to Ext.P11, giving reasons as to why her services may be retained as such. Appropriate orders shall be passed by the State Mission Director, after hearing the petitioner in person, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The State Mission Director shall consider the possibility of dropping the proceedings as such, in which case, it shall be done in such a manner that W.P ( C) No. 8084 of 2009 4 no stigma is attached to the petitioner by reason of the said coercive action. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 8084 of 2009 5 W.P ( C) No. 8084 of 2009 6