Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 32426 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
1. RADHA. L,
W/O MANAHARA V.T., AGED ABOUT-33 YEARS, WORKING AS RBSK STAFF NURSE, BAGEPALLI, R/AT YELLAMPALLI POST AND VILLAGE, BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561207.
2. DR. SHAMEENA.S.
W/O BABAJAN, AGED ABOUT-30 YEARS, WORKING AS RBSK OPHTHALMIC ASSISTANT, Digitally signed AT TALUK HEALTH OFFICE, by MARKONAHALLI BAGEPALLI, RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561207. COURT OF KARNATAKA R/AT NO.405, 2ND PART, GULUR,
3. DR. AISHWARYA.S.N., D/O S.NAGENDRA GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, AT TALUK HEALTH OFFICE, BAGEPALLI, R/O MARAGANAKUNTE VILLAGE, BAGEPALLI TALUK, -2-
4. DR. RAJU CHAVAN,
S/O TUKARAM CHAVAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, AT TALUK HEALTH OFFICE, BAGEPALLI, R/AT AGS COMPLEX, NEAR-MANASA HOSPITAL, DVG ROAD, BAGEPALLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR-DISTRICT-561207 YEWOOR TANDA, MARAGANAKUNTE VILLAGE, BAGEPALLI - TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561207
5. SMT. SUNITHA.P.N.
W/O SHIVANARAYANA S.L., AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, WORKING AS RBSK STAFF NURSE, GUDIBANDE, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561207, R/AT NO.215,SURAPALLI, MITTEMARI, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561207.
6. PRIYANKA.R,
D/O S.RAVINARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, WORKING AS RBSK OPHTHALMIC ASSISTANT, GUDIBANDE, R/AT NO.401, NAGAGERE, GOWRIBIDANUR-TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561228.
7. DR.JYOTHI.S., D/O SIDDAIAH, -3- AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, GUDIBANDE, R/AT NO.1027, 10TH C CROSS, 2ND STAGE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, MAHALAXMIPURAM, BENGALURU NORTH-560086.
8. DR.RANGAVENI B GOWDA,
W/O RAVINDRANATH V TODALABAGI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, GUDIBANDE, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561207 R/AT B BLOCK, BAPUJINAGAR, WARD NO.9, GUDIBANDE TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561209.
9. SMT.ASHARANI
W/O VENKATESH R, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, WORKING AS RBSK STAFF NURSE, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562110. RESIDING AT CHANNAHALLI, BETTAKOTE, DEVANAHALLI-TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562129.
10. SMT.VEENA.M, W/O SANJU.T.D., AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, WORKING AS RBSK OPHTHALMIC ASSISTANT, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562129. -4- R/A SROTHREYATHELLOHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562110
11. DR MANJUNATH.C
S/O LATE CHIKKANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562123. R/AT NO.18, BABANNA LAYOUT, NEW-EXTENSION, MALLASANDRA, BENGALURU-560057. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R HEMANTH RAJ, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, NL.105, 1ST FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE OFFICER NO.G.B-7, DISTRICT BHAVANA, PATRENAHALLI,
3. THE DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SOCIETY NO.G.B-7, DISTRICT BHAVANA, PATRENAHALLI, REP BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.
4. THE DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE OFFICER, -5- BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, NO.207, DISTRICT BHAVANA, BEERASANDRA, DEVANAHALLI-562110 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
5. THE DISTRICT HEALTH SOCIETY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PANCHAYATH, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, DISTRICT BHAVANA, BEERASANDRA, DEVANAHALLI-562110 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
6. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, RASHTRIYA BAL SWASTHYA KARYAKRAM (RBSK) AROGYA SOUDHA, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560023.
7. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, RCH RASHTRIYA BAL SWASTHYA KARYAKRAM (RBSK) AROGYA SOUDHA, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560023
8. MISSION DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION, AROGYA SOUDHA, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560023. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHIVAPRABHU.S. HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R4, R6 AND R8. R5 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CIRCULAR BEARING NO. NHM/RBSK/04/2024-25(E-1433000) DTD. 11.09.2024 AS PER ANNX-P ISSUED BY R-6 AND THE IMPUGNED -6- NOTICE BEARING NO. R.C.H.O/CHIPUR/N.H.M/117/2024-25 DTD. 04.11.2024 ISSUED BY THE R-2 AS PER ANNX-S AND T, IN SO FAR AS P-1 TO 8 IS CONCERNED BELONGS TO TALUK HEALTH OFFICE,
BAGEPALLI AND TALUK HEALTH OFFICE GUDIBANDI, CHIKKABALAPUR DISTRICT, THE IMPUGNED NOTICE-2 BEARING NO.NHM/RCH/BR/RD-63/2024-25 DTD. 21.11.2024 ISSUED BY THE R-4 AS PER ANNX-U, IN SO FAR AS P-9 AND 10 IS CONCERNED BELONGS TO TALUK HEALTH OFFICE, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AND NOTICE BEARING NO. NHM/RCH/BR/RDIN SO FAR AS P-11 IS CONCERNED BELONGS TO TALUK HEALTH OFFICE, NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners have challenged an order bearing No.NHM/RBSK/04/2024-25(E-1433000) dated 11.09.2024, issued by the respondent No.6, notice bearing No.R.C.H.O/CHIPUR/N.H.M/117/2024-25, dated 04.11.2024, issued by the respondent No.2, notice-2 bearing No.NHM/RCH/BR/RD-63/2024-25, dated 21.11.2024, issued by the respondent No.4 and notice No.NHM/RCH/BR/RD-62/2024- 25, dated 21.11.2024, issued by the respondent No.4, by which, the services of the petitioners were discontinued. -7-
2. The petitioners contend that they were appointed as
BAMS Doctors, Ophthalmic Assistant, Ayush Doctors and Staff Nurse, under the Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram (henceforth referred to as 'RBSK' for short) floated by the National Rural Health Mission. The purpose of the scheme was to screen children below the age of eighteen for early detection, treatment and management of diseases through dedicated mobile health teams in every district. The petitioners were appointed on contract basis between 2013 and 2024 and have continued from then on. However, out of 430 mobile health teams that are working in the State, 24 mobile health teams were withdrawn from the districts where they were in excess and were redistributed to districts where there was shortage. The petitioners contend that the respondent No.4 had issued
guidelines to identify the teams which did not perform well and
to discontinue their services after giving them 30 days' notice. The petitioners contend that the respondents had arbitrarily reviewed their performance and had discontinued them by passing cursory orders. The petitioners are therefore before this Court challenging an order terminating their services. -8-
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that
the performance of the petitioners was not reviewed by taking into consideration the targets achieved and that whatever was considered was not based on the available data on Swasthya Kirana app.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate after
securing instructions submitted that the respondents have undertaken a fresh exercise to review the performance of all the employees' health teams in the State of Karnataka. He submits that the case of the petitioners will also be re- examined by considering the reports uploaded on Swasthya Kirana app and appropriate orders would be passed. He adds that such exercise will be done within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission, this petition is
allowed. The impugned orders of termination and the consequent orders of notice issued are quashed. It is open for the respondents to review the performance of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any -9- opinion on the merits of the case and the respondents may take a decision independently. It is needless to mention that any salary unpaid till the date of the termination of the petitioners shall be paid to them within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. All issues are kept open.
7. In view of disposal of the petition, pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration and the same stand disposed off. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11