Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 924 (MP)

Ms. Roshni Shandilya v. State of M. P.

2014-07-30

K.K.TRIVEDI

body2014
JUDGMENT 1.Heard on the question of admission. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that she was appointed on contract basis as Accountant in Janpad Panchayat, Chhatarpur vide an order dated 05.12.2006. In terms of the appointment, an agreement was executed in between the petitioner and the Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat, Chhatarpur containing a condition that the term of contract would be initially for a period of one year and would be extendable from time to time. After execution of the said agreement when the petitioner was performing the duties, on certain occasion she took ill and proceeded on medical leave. However, without conducting any enquiry in respect of the illness of the petitioner, vide order dated 05.06.2008 the contract appointment of the petitioner was terminated, therefore, she was required to approach this Court against the said order. 3. The aforesaid writ petition has remained pending before this Court and was not entertained. From the documents annexed with the writ petition, it is clear that though the term of contract was one year but there was no order of extension of the said contract period any further. However, the petitioner was allowed to remain in service up to the year 2008. On certain occasion she proceeded on leave and since on one occasion the petitioner has remained absent for about 23 days for which application was made by the petitioner, ultimately the contract period of the petitioner was not extended and was terminated. If an action was taken under the contract agreement, a civil dispute has arisen but for that no proceedings were done in appropriate manner at the relevant time. However, it appears that a representation was made before the Collector, Chhatarpur by the petitioner, which according to the petitioner has not yet been decided. 4. This Court would not deem it proper to interfere in such an action after such a long gap of about 6 years as nothing is known whether anybody is appointed in place of the petitioner on contract basis as Accountant in the said Janpad Panchayat or not. However, if the representation is made by any employee, the same is required to be decided objectively by the employer. 5. However, if the representation is made by any employee, the same is required to be decided objectively by the employer. 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid, though not entering into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in the present petition, the same is disposed of with a direction to the Collector and District Programme Officer, National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, Chhatarpur to decide the representation made by the petitioner expeditiously, if not already decided, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. With the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.