Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15129 of 2019 Petitioner :- Smt. Hajrun Nisha Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Singh,Shiv Manorath Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and perused the record.
Present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 19.08.2019 passed by respondent no.5 i.e. Village Development Officer, Mukundpur, Block-Deoria Sadar, District- Deoria. A further prayer has also been made for directing the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful working of the petitioner as Gram Rojgar Sewak and to pay the petitioner her monthly emoluments regularly.
By the impugned order dated 19.8.2019, the contractual engagement of the petitioner as Gram Rojgar Sewak has been terminated as 2/3 members of the Gram Panchayat passed a resolution against the petitioner regarding dis-satisfactory services of the petitioner that money is demanded by her.
Challenging the same, submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that drawing attention to various affidavits and the list of MGNREGA job card holders is that they have given affidavits expressing their satisfaction with the petitioner's work and that she never demanded money. The complainant has also subsequently given the affidavit in favour of the petitioner. The submission is that under such circumstances, the impugned order dated 19.8.2019 is liable to be quashed and the petitioner is entitled to continue.
At the very outset, it may be noted that the petitioner is working on a contractual basis and the Government Order dated 3.7.2006 Annexure 4 to the petition, paragraph 7 clearly provides that this contractual appointment is for a period of one year which can be renewed at the most for a period of two years. The petitioner is admittedly, engaged as Gram Rojgar Sewak since 2004 and, therefore, she cannot claim her continuance in service as a matter of right.
Apart from that Annexure 1 to the affidavit is the Karyawahi Register of Gram Panchayat which clearly indicates that all the members present have passed the resolution against the petitioner. The requirement of passing resolution is only by 2/3 majority.
A perusal of the impugned order dated 19.8.2019 clearly reflect that the satisfaction regarding dis-satisfactory services of the petitioner has been recorded by the higher authority including District Magistrate-Deoria, the Managing Director of UPSIDC, Kanpur and only thereafter the approval was granted by the District Magistrate.
In the totality of the circumstances, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the order impugned herein.
The petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 Aditya