STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.versusSHYAMA PARDHI ETC. ETC.

A                           STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.
                                      v.
                           SHYAMA PARDHI ETC. ETC.

                                NOVEMBER 16, 1995
B
                 [K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA. JJ.]

          Se1vice LaM- :

          M.P. Public Health and Family Welfare Department Non- Ministerial
c   (Related to Directorate of Health Se1vices) Class III Se1vices Recruitment
    Rules, 1989 :

           Auxiliary Nurse-cum-Midwife-Persons without the prescribed
    qualifications selected, and appointed-Later their se1vices were tenninated
D   after se1ving notice-T1ibu11al directing reinstatment-Held : Since they did
    not possess the prescribed qualification their initial selection itself was per-se
    illegal-Violation of principles of natural justice did not arise-Administrative
    Law-Natural Justice.

           M.P. Public Health and Family Welfare Department Non- Mini-
E   sterial (Related to the Directorate of Health Services) Class-III Services
    Recruitment Rules, 1989 prescribed qualification for the appointment of
    Auxiliary Nurse-cum-Midwife (ANM), viz., 10+ 2 with Physics, Chemistry
    and Biology as qualitative subjects. The respondents had not possessed
    that qualification. The District Medical Officer Wrongly selected the
F   respondents and sent them to the training. After their successful comple-
    tion of the training, they were appointed as A.N~M. The respondents were
    served with notices stating that their selection for training was illegal and
    their services would be terminated. The respondents challenged the can-
    cellation of their appointment, before the Administrative Tribunal which
G   held that the respondents having been selected and undergone the training
    and the competent authority having duly appointed them, cancellation of
    their appointment without any opportunity is violative of the principles of
    natural justice, and directed their reinstatement with consequential
    benefits. Hence these appeals.

H         Allowing the appeals, this Court
                                           448
                       STATEv. SHYAMAPARDHI                             449

       HELD : Admittedly, the respondents had not possessed the pre-req- A
uisite qualification, namely, 10 + 2 with Physics, Chemistry and Biology as
subjects. The Rules specifically provide that qualification as a condition
for appointment to the post of ANM. Since prescribed qualifications had
not been satisfied, the initial selection to undergo training is per se illegal.
Later appointments thereof are in violation of the statutory rules. The B
Tribunal, therefore, was not right in directing the reinstatement of respon-
dents. The question of violation of the principles of natural justice does
not arise. [450-C-D]

      Shrawan Kumar !ha and Others v. State of Bihar and Others, AIR
(1991) SC 309 held inapplicable.                                              C
     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 11576 of
1995 Etc .
        •1
    From the Judgment and Order dated 20.6.94 of the Madhya Pradesh
Administrative, Tribunal Jabalpur in 0.A. No. 640 of 1994.          D
      Satish K Agnihotri, for the Appellants.

     Shiv Sagar Tiwari for the Respondents.

     The following Order of the Court was delivered :                         E
      Delay condoned.

      Leave granted.

      These appeals by special leave arise from the order of the Ad- F
ministrative Tribunal, Jabalpur M.P. Public Health and Family Welfare
Department Non-ministerial (Related to the Directorate Health Services)
Class-III Services Recruitment Rules, 1989 (for short 'the Rules'), made
under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, prescribed qualification
for the appointment of Auxiliary Nurse-cum-Midwife (ANM), viz., 10 + 2
with Physics, Chemistry and Biology as qualitative subjects. Admittedly, the G
respondents had not possessed that qualification. It would be seen that the
District Medical Officer, therefore, wrongly selected the respondents and
sent them to the training. After their successful completion of the training,
he made appointment as A.N.M. in the pay scale of Rs. 950-1350. The
respondents were served with notice dated 31st January, 1994 intimating H
                                                                                     ./
                                                                                          r



    450                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995) SUPP. 5 S.C.R.

A   that their selection for training was illegal and their services would be
    terminated with effect from February 23, 1994. The respondents challenged
    the cancellation of their appointment.

          The Tribunal in the impugned order had held that the respondents
    having been selected and undergone the training and the competent
B   authority having duly appointed them, cancellation of their appointment
    without _any opportunity is violative of the principles of natural justice and
    it accordingly set aside the order and directed their reinstatement with
    consequential benefits. Hence, these appeals by special leave.

       It is now an admitted fact across the Bar that the respondents had
c not possessed the pre-requisite qualification, namely, 10 + 2 with Physics,
  Chemistry and Biology as subjects. The Rules specifically provide that
  qualification as a condition for appointment to the post of ANM. Since
  prescribed qualifications had not been satisfied, the initial s~ction to
  undergo training is per se illegal. Later appointments thereof are in viola-
D tion of the statutory rules. The Tribunal, therefore, was not right in direct-
  ing the reinstatement of respondents. The question of violation of the
  principles of natural justice does not arise. The ratio of Shrawan Kumar
  Jha and Others v. State of Bihar and Others, AIR 1991 SC 309, strongly
  relied on, has no application to the facts of this case. That w<:1s a case
  where appellants possessed initial qualifications but they did not undergo
E
  the training. Since the appointment was set aside on the ground of want of
  training, this Court interfered with; directed the Government to reinstate
  them into service and further directed them to send the appellants therein
  for training.

F          The appeals are allowed and O.As. stand dismissed. No costs.

    G.N.                                                        Appeals allowed.