Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 772 (ALL)

Ramjeet v. State of U. P.

2023-03-21

VIVEK CHAUDHARY

body2023
JUDGMENT : (Vivek Chaudhary, J.) : These are connected bunch of writ petitions whereby petitioners have raised common grievance, therefore they are decided together. 2. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Petitioners appeared for selection for the post of Food and Sanitary Inspector in the U.P. Palika (Centralized) Health Services in the selection process held in the year 2013. They were duly selected for the said post of Food and Sanitary Inspector for the Municipal Bodies and given their due appointments. However, they claim that they are assigned only work of Sanitary Inspector and duty of Food Inspector is not being assigned to them. They claim that they are holding and posses qualification in the field of Food Inspector. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 13.10.2016 passed in Writ Petition No. 1354 of 2016 (Sudhir B. Fating and another v. State of Maharashtra and others). In the said judgment, the Bombay High Court also considered and allowed the writ petition issuing following directions: ''17.In the result, we pass the following order : ORDER (i) The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to impart training to the petitioners and the other Food Inspectors. The said training shall commence within a period of four weeks from today. Needless to state that the respondent No. 3Corporation shall bear the costs of the said training.'' 5. Learned Standing Counsel places reliance upon paragraph 6 of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4 and states that the State Government vide Government Order dated 25.9.2008 had constituted a separate directorate of food and sanitary administration and thus, the food sampling is now assigned to the newly constituted department. In the said circumstances, the Municipal Bodies is not assigning work of food sampling etc. to the Food and Sanitary Inspector appointed under the local bodies under the Urban Development Authority. 6. The Municipal Bodies are independent statutory bodies created under law. They are required to perform the duties assigned to them under the law by which they are created. They are responsible for the health of the citizens living in the said areas. to the Food and Sanitary Inspector appointed under the local bodies under the Urban Development Authority. 6. The Municipal Bodies are independent statutory bodies created under law. They are required to perform the duties assigned to them under the law by which they are created. They are responsible for the health of the citizens living in the said areas. Proper management of food sanitary as well as medical services is a necessary essence of good health of the people in the said municipal area. The Municipal Bodies cannot ignore to fulfill the responsibilities assigned to it under law for which they are created merely because the State Government has also created a parallel department and has assigned certain duties to the said department would not absolve the Municipal Bodies from performing the duties prescribed upon them under law. Food testing is a necessary part of the duties assigned under law upon the Municipal Bodies. There is also post of Food and Sanitary Inspector created in the Municipalities who are responsible to take care of the duties prescribed under Act. Hence, the respondents are duty bound to assign duties and responsibility of food inspector also as required under law to the petitioners alongwith the duties of sanitary work. 7. Thus, all writ petitions are allowed. 8. Respondents are directed to ensure that the duty of Food Inspector is also assigned to the petitioners and ensure them to perform the same alongwith the duty of Sanitary Inspector. They shall ensure that duties of Food and Sanitary Inspector are performed by them as prescribed under law. In case any further training for the said purpose is required, such further training shall also be provided to the petitioners.