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

2025 Supreme(Raj) 1274

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
DINESH MEHTA, J.
 Shobha Soni - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent 
CW / 2192 / 2024
Decided On : 13-01-2025

The court ruled that the roles of Protection Officers and Outreach Workers are statutory and must be filled through regular recruitment, not outsourced via a placement agency.

Headnote:

(A) Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 2012 - Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Rules, 2013 - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - The petitioners challenged the order allowing the engagement of Protection Officers and Outreach Workers through a placement agency instead of regular recruitment as mandated by the Mission Vatsalya Guidelines. (Paras 1-2)

(B) Employment Law - The court held that the duties of Protection Officers and Outreach Workers are statutory and cannot be outsourced, emphasizing that the State must create sanctioned posts and follow the prescribed selection process. (Paras 10-14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners contested the legality of the State's decision to hire Protection Officers and Outreach Workers via a placement agency, arguing that such roles require regular recruitment as per established guidelines.

Findings of Court:
The court found the State's action arbitrary and quashed the impugned order, directing the creation of sanctioned posts and adherence to the selection process outlined in the Mission Vatsalya Guidelines.

Issues: The main issues included the legality of engaging personnel through a placement agency and the necessity of regular recruitment for statutory roles.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the responsibilities of Protection Officers and Outreach Workers are statutory and cannot be outsourced, thus requiring the State to create sanctioned posts and follow the guidelines for recruitment.

Result: The impugned order dated 05.02.2024 is quashed.

Order

13/01/2025

1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 05.02.2024 issued by the respondent no.1 (Commissioner & Special Secretary & CEO, Rajasthan State Child Protection Society), whereby sanction has been given to take services of Protection Officers (12) and Outreach Workers (11) in various districts on ‘Job Work Basis’ through a placement agency.

2. The petitioners have challenged such decision of the respondent - State on the ground that such posts are required to be filled-in by way of regular recruitment; that as per the ‘Mission Vatsalya’ Guidelines (Annexure-10), the Protection Officers and Outreach Workers are required to be selected as per clause (i) of Para (B) of District Annexure-III, whereas, the respondents are going to engage persons to work as Protection Officers and Outreach Workers through a placement agency.

3. While maintaining that the duties of Protection Officers and Outreach Workers cannot be brought within the ambit of services, learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the State’s decision to engage persons under the provisions of Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 2012’) read with Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Rules, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of

2013’) is illegal and arbitrary.

4. Inviting Court’s attention towards the roles and responsibilities of Protection Officers and Outreach Workers, learned counsel argued that the nature, duties and responsibilities to be discharged by persons occupying these posts are such that regularly recruited candidates alone can discharge such function, as most of the responsibilities are part of welfare activities and further because their duties involve dealing with children.

5. Learned counsel raised a grievance that the State has neither created/sanctioned posts of Protection Officers (Institutional Care/Non-Institutional Care) and Outreach Workers, nor has it framed rules for appointment and service conditions in this regard.

6. Mr. Bhandari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent – State on the other hand argued that the petitioners cannot challenge the manner in which the State proposes to engage its workforce. He argued that while engaging Protection Officers and Outreach Workers under the Act of 2012 through a placement agency, due regard shall be given to their qualification and competence. It was also argued that in the guise of such challenge, the petitioners are continuing with the respondent-

State without having any legal right.

7. He further argued that the Mission Vatsalya Guidelines issued by the Government of India is directory and the petitioners cannot claim any vested right from such guidelines.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

9. Before proceeding with the matter, it will be apt to reproduce roles, responsibilities and duties of Protection Officers and Outreach Workers, as under:-

A. Roles and Responsibilities of Duty holder in DCPU

1) Protection Officer (Institutional Care)

Under the supervision of the DCPO, the Protection Officer (Institutional Care) shall ensure effective implementation of child protection programs and policies relating to children in need of care and protection at the district and local levels. He/she shall be responsible for ensuring effective institutional/residential care services at the district level for all children in need of care and protection. Every district shall have a minimum of one Protection Officer, and maximum of three Protection Officers (Institutional Care) on the basis of number of blocks, geographical spread and case load of the district. In case the Child Welfare Committee has a heavy case load, the State Government can appoint one full time Protection Officer to the Committee. The specific roles and responsibilities of a Protection Officer (Institutional Care) shall include:-

i) Identify families and children at risk to prevent destitu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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