MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)
J.K. Maheshwari, J
ARCHANA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 4751 (S) of 2006
Decided on : 02-11-2006
J.K. Maheshwari, J.
This order shall also govern the disposal of following writ petitions:
(2) W.P. No. 3874/2006 (S) Sarda Rawat and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Ors. (3) W.P. No. 4405/2006 (S) Meer Bhuria and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Ors. (4) W.P. No. 4547/2006 (S) Premlata and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Ors. (5) W.P. No. 4752/2006 (S) Shayani Sissodiya v. State of M.P. and Ors. (6) W.P. No. 4753/2006 (S) Sunita v. State of M.P. and Ors. (7) W.P. No. 4754/2006 (S) Asha v. State of M.P. and Ors. (8) W.P. No. 4755/2006 (S) Ku: Ranubala v. State of M.P. and Ors. (9) W.P. No. 4938/2006 (S) Ku. Sharda v. State of M.P. and Ors.
All these petitions have been filed challenging the orders dated 5-7-2006, 11-7-2006, 27-7-2006, 20-7-2006, 28-7-2006 and 19-7-2006 by which the selection of Petitioners for training of Multi Purpose Family Health Worker (hereinafter referred as 'MPFHW') has been ordered to be cancelled, in view of the instructions issued by the Directorate of Health Services dated 5-7-2006, 20-7-2006 and 24-7-2006.
It is the case of Petitioners that they have passed the High School Certificate Examination after the Education Session 1996-97 from Madhya Pradesh Rajya Open School Board, Bhopal. The aforesaid Board, is recognised by the Government and its High School Certificate Examination is at par to the High School of Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, M.P. as per the notification dated 4-10-1996. It is further a case of Petitioners that the selection for training of MPFHW are governed by the Rules framed by the Government in exercise of powers conferred by the proviso of Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Those Rules are known as M.P. Public Health and Family Welfare Department Non-Ministerial (Related to the Directorate of Health Services) Class-III Service Recruitment Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred as 'Rules').
Under Rule 6, the method of the recruitment has been specified, Rule 8 further specifies the conditions of eligibility for direct recruits. By which, it is apparent that the candidates must possess the requisite qualification as specified in column No. 5 of Schedule (iii) for the posts of MPFHW. The qualification prescribed after amendment of rules in the year 1997 is reproduced herein below:
Name of post included in the Service Minimum age limit Upper age limit Essential qualification
(B) Female Health worker 18 30 (1) should have passed 10th class examination in 10 + 2 Education System. Candidates having passed 10th Class Examination with Mathematics, Science and Biology shall be preferred.
(2) Should have passed 18 months training course of Female Health Worker.
Bare perusal of the aforesaid, it is apparent that candidates who have passed the 10th Class examination in 10 + 2 education system are eligible to participate. But those candidates who have passed 10th class examination with the mathematics, science and biology having preference. They should have further passed 18 months training course of female health worker, for their appointment. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that, as per advertisement also the educational qualification was prescribed as under:
The candidate must have passed 10th class high school examination in 10 + 2 education system, recognised by the M.P. Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal Bhopal or they should have passed the Higher Secondary Examination (old pattern) with the subject Physics, Chemistry and Biology.
It is further a case of Petitioners that as per the qualification prescribed under the advertisement as well as under the Rules Petitioners have passed the High School Certificate Examination by 10 + 2 system. Under the rules or as per the advertisement they are not required to pass High School with science subjects for their eligibility. The language of the rule only indicates the preference to them who have passed High School Certificate Examination with science subjects. However, Petitioners have submitted their application as per advertisement; after due select
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.