D.N. Patel, J. - (1.) This appellant is an original petitioner whose W.P. (S) No. 1361 of 2016 was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 4th April, 2017. Reasons:
(2.) Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this appellant is a back door entrant in the services of the respondents. Back door entrant has to go out by same entry. Those who got the public employment without there being public advertisement or without following any selection procedure or if the employment is obtained by such type of back door entry without giving any opportunity to the public at large, they have to go home, even after, service of 10 years or service of 15 years or may be more than that. They should thank themselves for getting such type of public employment by influence. Now, it is a high time, to bring to an end, the "influenced employment".
(3.) It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohd. Ashif v. State of Bihar reported in (2010) 5 SCC 475 in paragraphs 13 and 14, which read as under: - "13. Applying the test laid down by this Court in Umadevi (3) case and the cases referred to above, to the case at hand, there is no gainsaying that the appointments of the appellants as Primary Health Workers were totally illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution which guarantee equality of opportunity to all those who were otherwise eligible for such appointments. The Chief Medical Officer who had made the appointments was not vested with the power to do so nor were the claims of other candidates eligible for appointments against the posts to which the appellants were appointed, considered. Surprisingly, the appointments had come by way of absorption of the appellants who were working as Voluntary Health Workers on a monthly honorarium of Rs. 50 only. 14. The High Court has, in our opinion, correctly held that there was no cadre of Voluntary Health Workers who were working on an honorarium in State-run dispensaries. The very nature of the appointment given to the appellants as Voluntary Health Workers was honorary in nature which entitled them to the payment of not more than Rs. 50 per month. It is difficult to appreciate how the Chief Medical Officer could have regularised/absorbed such Voluntary Health Workers doing honorary service against the post of Primary Health Workers which carried a regular pay scale and which could be filled only in accordance with the procedure prescribed for that purpose. The appointment of the appellants against the said posts was thus manifestly illegal and wholly undeserved to say the least. Inasmuch as these appointments came to be cancelled pursuant to the said directions no matter nearly a decade and a half later the termination could not be said to be illegal so as to warrant interference of a writ court for reinstatement of those illegally appointed. The High Court was, in that view of the matter, justified in declining interference with the order of cancellation and dismissing the writ petitions." (emphasis supplied) ;