Full Judgment
Abhay Kumar Dwivedi versus State of MP and three otheRs.09.11.2012.
Shri V.D.S.Chouhan for the petitioner.
Shri S.S.Bisen, Government Advocate, for the State on advance notice.
Petitioner claims to be appointed as an Operation Theatre Attendant and not it is his grievance that vide order - Annexure P/1 petitioner is granted certain additional duties apart from the work of Operation Theatre Attendant.
It is stated that the work allotted to the petitioner in the Out Patient Department is contrary to the appointment of the petitioner in the OT Department and, therefore, he has filed this writ petition.
Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Government Advocate, submits that Annexure P/1 impugned in this writ petition is only an allocation of work order and the same does not call for any interference.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I see no reason to interfere into the matter.
Petitioner may be an Operation Theatre Attendant, as certain work of attending to the Out Patient Department is also granted to him, petitioner wants this Court to interfere into the same.
The work granted to the petitioner is not shown to be in violation to any statutory rule or regulation not is it brought to the notice of this Court as to how and in what manner the said order violates the terms and conditions of his appointment.
In that view of the above, I see no reason to interfere into the matter.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
(RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-