SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(AP) 506

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, G. SHYAM PRASAD, JJ.
Gangikuntal Sridhar & Others – Appellants
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by the Principal Secretary Health, Medical & Family Welfare (1) Dept. & Others – Respondents
Writ Appeal No. 1235 of 2016 (Writ Appeal (SR) No.75322 of 2016), 318, 319, 320, 323, 324, 325, 414, 418, 437, 607, 612, 730 & 755 of 2016
Decided On : 11-11-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:S. Ramachandra Rao, Senior Counsel for K.R. Prabhakar, Vedula Srinivas, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Advocate General (AP).

Headnote:

Labour law - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226, 14, 12, 38, 39, 42, 43, 43A, 309, 16(1), 162, 23-24, 38 to 49, 51-A, 330 to 342 - Co-operative Societies Act, 1995 - Labour (Regulation and Adoption) Act, 1970 - Section 13 - Police Act, 1801 - Section 17 - Contract Act - Sections 3(A), 7 and 23 - Employment and service matter - jurisdiction - on the sole ground that the petitioners need to approach the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal to establish the relationship of master and servant and the employer and employee and that the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not an appropriate remedy. Writ Appeal has been filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh feeling aggrieved by the direction issued to it by the learned single Judge to maintain status quo for a period of two months to facilitate the writ petitioners to avail alternative remedy - issue raised by the writ petitioners, but, he has, however, requested that instead of remanding the cases to the learned single Judge for adjudicating the writ petitions on merits, the writ appeals may be disposed of on merits by us.- The learned counsel for the appellants/writ petitioners accepted this proposal of the learned Advocate General. Though in normal course we would have remanded the cases to the learned single Judge for adjudication on merits in consideration of the request of the learned Advocate General, we have heard all the learned counsel appearing for the appellants/writ petitioners and also the learned Advocate General for the State of Andhra Pradesh on merits - Held, appellants are entitled to be continued as Aarogya Mitras with temporary status so long as the posts against which they are engaged remain within the sanctioned strength in terms of Clause III of G.O. Rt. Finance (SMPC) Department and process for filling up the posts on permanent basis is not initiated. The appellants are also entitled to receive the remuneration as revised from time to time under the extant GOs issued by the State for outsourced employees or the resolutions that may be passed by the Trust. If any of the appellants are found committing any misconduct or their services are found not satisfactory, the Trust shall be free to proceed against them by following the principles of natural justice. This judgment does not however preclude the Trust from creating additional posts and engaging personnel with higher qualifications to guide the appellants in rendering proper service to the beneficiaries under the scheme, nor it restrains the State and the Trust from engaging personnel with higher qualifications if they so choose as envisaged under the impugned G.O. without disturbing the appellants - Natural for the appellants to suffer heartburn while comparing their position with that of their one time colleagues presently working in the State . Though this factor has no bearing on our decision making, the same we felt is nevertheless relevant for a holistic adjudication of the dispute - respondents cannot be permitted to discontinue the existing Aarogya Mitras unceremoniously - abruptly severing the master and servant relationship and ignoring their responsibility arising out of such relationship towards the appellants. Such an action, we have no doubt in our mind, constitutes patent arbitrariness and manifest violation of provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution - Ordered Accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.

1. These writ appeals arise out of common order dt.31.3.2016 in W.P. No.2176 of 2016 and batch. Writ Appeal (SR) No.75322 of 2016 and Writ Appeal Nos.318, 319, 320, 323, 324, 325, 414, 418, 607, 612, 730 and 755 of 2016 are filed by the petitioners in the writ petitions which were dismissed by the learned single Judge on the sole ground that the petitioners need to approach the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal to establish the relationship of master and servant and the employer and employee and that the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not an appropriate remedy. Writ Appeal No.437 of 2016 has been filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh feeling aggrieved by the direction issued to it by the learned single Judge to maintain status quo for a period of two months to facilitate the writ petitioners to avail alternative remedy.

2. During the hearing, the learned Advocate General for the State of Andhra Pradesh submitted that he is not pressing the writ appeal filed by the State since with the expiry of two months period from the date of passing of it, the order worked itself out. The learned Advocate General also conceded that this Court has jurisdiction to decide the issue raised by the writ petitioners, but, he has, however, requested that instead of remanding the cases to the learned single Judge for adjudicating the writ petitions on merits, the writ appeals may be disposed of on merits by us. The learned counsel for the appellants/writ petitioners accepted this proposal of the learned Advocate General. Though in normal course we would have remanded the cases to the learned single Judge for adjudication on merits, in consideration of the request of the learned Advocate General, we have heard all the learned counsel appearing for the appellants/writ petitioners and also the learned Advocate General for the State of Andhra Pradesh on merits.

BACKGROUND FACTS

3. The combined State of Andhra Pradesh introduced a scheme called ‘Rajiv Aarogyasri Health Insurance Scheme’ with effect from 1.4.2007 for providing quality health care to the families falling below poverty line (BPL). The scheme was initially introduced as a pilot project in the Districts of Anantapur, Mahaboobnagar and Srikakulam in the year 2007. A Deed of Trust, namely, ‘Aarogyasri Health Care Trust’ (for short, “the Trust”) was executed in the name of the Governor of the State of Andhra Pradesh, on 24.08.2007, vide Document No.278 of 2007, whereunder ‘Rajiv Aarogyasri Community Health Insurance Scheme’ (for short, “the scheme”) was formulated. The recitals of the Trust Deed show that the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh was the Chairman, the Hon’ble Minister for Medical Education & Health Insurance was Vice-Chairman-I, the Principal Secretary to Government, Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department was Vice-Chairman-II and other Government functionaries were the Trustees. The Trust inter alia envisaged identification of network hospitals in which the beneficiaries of the scheme could be provided healthcare and surgical operations. Clause 6 of the Trust Deed recited that the Trust will be fully owned by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. The appendix to the Trust Deed contains salient features of the scheme. The main objective of the scheme is to improve access to BPL families to quality medical care for treatment of diseases involving hospitalization and surgery through an identified network of healthcare providers. To start with, six diseases were identified for providing treatment to the beneficiaries.

PLEADINGS OF THE APPELLANTS/ WRIT PETITIONERS:

4. Since the pleadings in all the writ petitions are more or less similar, it would suffice if the averments in one of the writ petitions are briefly referred. Accordingly, we have chosen W.P. No.3724 of 2016 filed by 134 persons. The petitioners averred that


































































































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top