Srinagar, Dec 13: The High Court has dismissed a petition seeking extension in the services of the medical and paramedical staff appointed in 2021 on contractual basis under the Emergency Covid Response Programme (ECRP).
Hearing a writ petition by 116 physicians, anaesthetists, paediatricians, medical officers, nurses, paramedical and technical staff, Justice M A Chowdhary partly allowed and partly rejected it.
The petition was dismissed to the extent of the relief asking for continuation of the petitioners for a period of three years. But it was allowed to the extent of other reliefs including direction to the respondents “to release Ayushman as well as Covid incentives in terms of the Notification No. 01-HME of 2019 dated 19.01.2019 in favour of the petitioners and also to consider the condition to incorporate five (05) numbers as weightage in the future advertisement notices for the posts for which the petitioners had rendered their services to the government under ECRP as contractual staff”.
The petitioners prayed that the respondents be directed to allow the petitioners to complete the period of three years of services as mandated vide condition/clause No. XII of the Government Order No. 398- JK(HME) of 2021, dated 18.05.2021.
Furthermore, they pleaded that the respondents be directed to release Ayushman incentives as well as Covid incentives in terms of the Notification No. 01-HME of 2019 dated 19.01.2019 in favour of the petitioners.
Additional prayer of the petitioners was that the respondents be directed to incorporate the condition in the future advertisement notice with regard to five marks as weightage, as has been done in the previous advertisement notices, under the ECRP.
Essentially, the case of the petitioners is that they were appointed on contractual basis for a period of one year in terms of the Government Order No. 398-JK(HME) of 2021 dated 18.05.2021.
Two 500 bedded temporary Covid hospitals, one each at Jammu and Srinagar, were established and 1366 posts were created to man the hospitals. The initiative had been carried out in collaboration with the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO), Ministry of Defense, Government of India.
The petitioners claimed that at the end of the extension period, they continued to report for their duties though without any formal order of extension of their engagements.
Respondents stated “in view of the closure of DRDO Hospitals, there was no justification for extending the tenure as the petitioners were engaged in the said hospitals only; therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed”.
Justice Chowdhary observed “once the government has decided to close down the temporary hospitals established in view of emergency related to Covid-19 pandemic, where the petitioners were contractually employed, the respondents cannot be asked to continue their services as contractual employees without any work or their need.”
