Babu Gain v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2357 of 2015

1. Babu Gain S/O Shri Jyotin Gain Aged About 39 years R/O P.V. 107, (Shakti Nagar), Post Irpanar, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

2. Khokan Bishwas S/O Shri Rajanikant Bishwas Aged About 42 Years R/O P.V. 38, P.O. Pakhanjur District Kanker Chhattisgarh

3. Vijay Bepai S/O Shri Kala Chand Bepari Aged About 36 Years R/O Bande Bazar, Post Bande Colony, District Kanker Chhattisgarh

4. Nihar Biswas S/O Late Shri Harihar Biswas Aged About 42 Years R/O Village Bande, Post Bande, District Kanker Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department of Health And Family Welfare, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Directorate Health Services Pension Bada, Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Medical And Health Officer Kanker, District Kanker Chhattisgarh

4. Chhattsigarh Paramedical Council Through its Registrar, Chhattisgarh Paramedical Council, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners Shri DK Wankhede, Advocate For Respondents/State Shri Shashank Thakur, GA for the State Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 02/07/2015 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue raised in this petition is with regard to equivalence of qualification of the one year training course of Paramedics for appointment as MPHW. 2.

Learned counsel for the parties would not dispute that Writ Appeal No. 530/2013 dealing with similar issue has been disposed of by the

Division Bench on 30/10/2014 in the following manner :- "Without pressing the appeals on merits it is submitted now that the State Government has taken a policy decision with regard to equivalence of qualification of the one year training course of Paramedics for appointment as MPHW and a clarificatory order has also been issued by the Health Department on 31.6.2013 in furtherance of Rules for appointment dated 6.7.2013, the only issue which remains for consideration is of retrospectivity for which the appellants desire to pursue the matter with the State Government.

The appeals are disposed with that liberty. Any such representation filed is expected to be disposed expeditiously.

Nothing in this order shall be deemed or construed as any opinion or observation on merits of the matter by us."

3.

In view of above, the present writ petition is also disposed of in similar terms.

Sd/- J U D G E Prashant Kumar Mishra ashu