- (1.) Petitioner appellants, who are 200 in number, are before this Court assailing the validity of the order dated 9.9.2013 passed in Writ-A No. 47977 of 2013 (Jitendra & 199 others Vs. Union of India & others) wherein the learned Single Judge has proceeded to non-suit the claim of petitioner appellants by mentioning that the nature of engagement of petitioners is purely contractual and petitioners have no indefeasible right to compel the respondent to engage them.
(2.) On the presentation of the present special appeal a Division Bench of this Court proceeded to pass the following order: "We have heard Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare, for the petitioners. Learned standing counsel appears for the State respondents. Ms. Jyotsna Srivastava appears for respondent No.1 - Union of India. The petitioners were engaged as Samudayik Suvidha Data (SSD) on contract under the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) Scheme of the Central Government. The scheme was discontinued by the Central Government with an advise to the State Government to formulate its own human resource policy, which may include continuing present staff for implementing the objects of the mission. It is submitted that by an order dated 19.08.2013, issued by the State Government, the petitioners have been disengaged. The State Government in the said order dated 19.08.2013, has observed in para 2 that since the Central Government has not given any direction with regard to SSD under the NRLM Scheme, until any instructions are received from the Central Government, the services of SSD under the scheme cannot be taken by the State Government. Learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the petitioners do not have legally enforceable right. The engagement under the scheme was purely contractual basis, and do not confer any right upon the petitioners to compel the respondent to continue to engage them. Learned Single Judge further stated that the State Government has not laid down any policy for engagement of SSD, and the Mission Director has found no exigency for engagement of SSD. Prima facie, we find substance in the contention of Sri Ashok Khare that the circular letter dated 19.08.2013 of the Mission Director, State Rural Livelihood Mission, Lucknow does not talk about any step taken for continuance of the scheme. Since the Central Government has recommended for continuance of the scheme, which will depend upon the quality and experience of existing staff appointed by the Central Government, the State Government must take a policy decision for continuance of scheme, and for absorption/adjustment of the existing staff. As an interim measure, we direct that until further orders, the operation of the judgment dated 09.09.2013 of the learned Single Judge shall remain stayed. The State Government is directed to take the policy decision, with regard to continuance of the scheme and absorption or adjustment of Samudayik Suvidha Data (SSD) engaged under the NRLM Scheme to be formulated by the State Government. The policy decision in this regard will be taken by the State Government within four weeks, and the same will be filed along with the counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit will be filed by the petitioners within one week thereafter. List on 12.11.2013."
(3.) Pursuant to the order passed by this Court the State Government has taken decision dated 7.8.2014 giving therein reasons as to why petitioner appellants' claim cannot be adverted to and the benefits that can be extended to the petitioner appellants in future.;