Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.Y. KOGJE, J.
MADHYAHN BHOJAN YOJNA KARMACHARI SANGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & others - Respondent
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7323 of 2018
Decided On : 05-07-2021
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Pleased to issue a writ or mandamus or any other appropriate writ - Order or direction to hold and declare that the action of the respondent authorities in not treating the members of the petitioner - Service benefits - issue of payment/salary/benefits of those who are engaged in service - priority should be given to the women belonging to backward community and preferably widows, destitute and deserted woman and belonging to a class below poverty line. He submits that in each Midday Meal Centre one Cook and one Assistant/Helper are appointed. Although such appointment is given every year upon commencement of the new term of the school, most of the employees are continuously engaged in the Scheme - It has also been provided that in absence of any irregularity, the women employees who are already serving in Centre should be preferred to be continued appointment - Although fresh appointment orders are given upon commencement of the new term, all the members of petitioner association are continuously in service since last many years. He submits that the petitioner association has made several representations to the respondent authorities time and again for absorption of all employees as employees of the State Government and grant them all service benefits at par with the other Government employees –
Finding of the Court:
There is no bar on people working under the scheme to seek employment/work/business anywhere else and therefore, members of petitioner be treated at par with the Government servant, is fallacious as if the relevant provisions under the scheme for engaging the claims which were put as condition of appointment is perused, it is a disqualification for an individual who is engaged at any other place with a honorarium, such person would not be given appointment Resolution is to mean that such scheme also envisages employment to people of lower strata of society - There may not be a case where an individual is drawing honorarium from two organizations at a same time - Court in the order in Special Civil Application and allied matter is concerned, circumstances under which order came to be passed is made clear itself in the opening paras. Moreover, the said directions were only at interim stage and nothing is brought on record by petitioners to indicate final outcome of such pending case - Court does not find anything to suggest exploitation methods are being adopted. It may happen as it happens in many of the beneficial scheme that some scrupulous elements do find loopholes in the scheme and take advantage for personal benefit mostly monetary or otherwise - Scheme appears to be achieving it objective to provide meal to school children and employment opportunity to target section at the village level and any interference in such functionality will run a risk of affecting the working of benevolent scheme especially a scheme where the beneficiaries i.e. the primary school children have no voice of their own - Court does not find any reason to issue directions as prayed for by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India –
Result: Petition is dismissed
ORDER :
1 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner, inter alia, praying as under:-
(C) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ or mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the respondents to treat the members of the petitioner association and to pay them the salary and other service benefits at par with other government employees.
(D) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ or mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the respondents to implement the directions issued by the Honourable Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.196 of 2001 with effect from 1st May 2004 and to pay the arrears to each and every Sanchalak/Organiser of Midday Meal Scheme;
(E) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ or mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the respondents to make the payment to Sanchalaks/Organisers of Midday Meal Schemes at the same rate as provided under Minimum Wages Act decided by the State Government from time to time.”
2. Though the petition is agitating the issue of payment/salary/benefits of those who are engaged in service under a scheme popularly known as Mid-Day-Meal Scheme, the Court would like to examine such rights vis-a-vis the object of the scheme which is predominantly for the benefit of the primary school going children. These children have no voice for their grievances and their interest usually gets compromised while balancing the rights of those meant to serve them and the rights of children themselves.
3. Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that one of the purposes of implementation of Midday Meal Scheme is also providing employment opportunities in the village. As per Government Resolution of the State Government and the guidelines given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the priority should be given to the women belonging to the backward community and preferably widows, destitute and deserted woman and belonging to a class below poverty line. He submits that in each Midday Meal Centre, one Sanchalak/Organizer, one Cook and one Assistant/Helper are appointed. Although such appointment is given every year upon commencement of the new term of the school, most of the employees are continuously engaged in the Scheme. It has also been provided that in absence of any irregularity, the women employees who are already serving in the Centre should be preferred to be continued appointment. Accordingly, although fresh appointment orders are given upon commencement of the new term, all the members of petitioner association are continuously in service since last many years. He submits that the petitioner association has made several representations to the respondent authorities time and again for absorption of all the employees as employees of the State Government and grant them all the service benefits at par with the other Government employees. However, such representations have not been considered and decided by the respondent authorities till date.
3.1 Learned senior advocate for the petitioner submits that the Midday Meal Scheme has also object of providing opportunity of employment and the nature of the scheme is permanent as the same has been floated under the directions of the Apex Court. In that view of the matter, keeping the members of petitioner association on contractual basis without creating the post in the establishment is amounting to exploitation. From the provisions of the scheme, learned senior advocate has tried to point out that the conditio
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
