Dr. Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar vs State Of Bihar And Ors

Heard counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has filed this writ application for the following reliefs:-

(I) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order of Civil Surgeon-cum-Member Secretary, District Health Society,

Begusarai, vide memo no. 168, dated 19.2.2020 (Annexure-5) by the effect of which petitioner has been terminated with immediate effect from his

service without any prior notice or opportunity to show cause.

(II) For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent authorities to give all consequential reliefs

to the petitioner upon restoration of the service of the petitioner.

(III) For issuance of an appropriate and interim writ, order or direction for allowing the petitioner to resume services in Referral Hospital, Manjhaul,

Begusarai during the pendency of the instant writ application.â€​

Short fact of the case is that vide letter no. 3418 dated 6.1.2006, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Dentist in Referal Hospital, Manjhaul,

District â€" Begusarai on contract basis pursuant to an agreement, which was made between the parties.

It is the case of the petitioner that the service of the petitioner on the post of Dentist was extended from time-to-time, but on 19.2.2020, vide letter

no. 169, the Civil Surgeon-cum-Member Secretary, District Health Society, Begusarai terminated the petitioner from his service without giving any

show cause and in violation of conditions of the agreement made between them, which is gross violation of the principle of natural justice.

In this case, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 5, in which, it has been stated that appointment of the petitioner was

made on the post of Dentist on contract basis till regular appointments are made by the Bihar Public Service Commission. In paragraph â€" 7 of the

counter affidavit, it has been stated that as per recommendation of Bihar Public Service Commission, 543 Dentists have already been appointed and

this petitioner does not find place in the said appointment and thereafter, the department has taken decision to terminate all contractual appointed

Dentists.

In response thereof, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date, no regular appointment has been made against the post, on which, the

petitioner was functioning.

However, counsel for the respondent/State submits that all the regular appointed Dentists have already been posted against sanctioned posts and in

Referral Hospital, Manjhaul, Begusarai, where petitioner was working on contract basis, was not a sanctioned post.

Law is well settled that in matters of concluded contract the parties per se are bound by the terms and conditions of the contract and unless there is

some breach of any fundamental right of a citizen it is not for the Court to exercise its power under writ jurisdiction because writ jurisdiction would not

enforce the terms of the contract. Contractual appointment does not give any right, interest or benefit of a regular appointment. For any breach of

agreement, the remedy for him would lie under common law and not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move before the appropriate

forum for redressal of his grievance. It is made clear that any finding of this Court will not prejudice the case of the petitioner.

With above observation, the writ petition is dismissed.