The Karnataka High Court in the case DR. S. P. Raghunath Versus the Union Of India observed and rejected a petition filed by a 71-year-old retired Engineer in Chief of Central Government for seeking direction to appoint him as the Chief Engineer on honorarium basis at Sri Rama Janma Bhumi Theertha Kshethra.
The government of India in February 2020 set up a trust Sri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra for the construction and management Ram Mandir in Ayodhya.
The Single judge bench comprising of Justice SG Pandit observed while rejecting the petition filed by Dr. S. P. Raghunath, the bench stated that the trust set up Sri Rama Janma Bhumi theertha Kshethra is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, however a writ would not be maintainable. The bench added that no writ can be issued for appointing petitioner as Chief Engineer at Sri Rama Janma Bhumi Theertha Kshethra.
In the present case, it was claimed by the petitioner that he is a retired Engineer in Chief from the respondents-Central Government and after his appointment, the petitioner was appointed by the IIT on contract basis for a period of two years for implementing projects including IIT at Dharwad.
It was submitted by the counsel, Advocate HM Umesh that the petitioner has made representations in this regard but the same were rejected and even the petitioner request through Grievance Redressal Web Portal was not considered properly and was rejected showing sub judice matter.
The plea was opposed by Assistant Solicitor General H. Shanthi Bhushan, stating that a retired Engineer in Chief has no right to seek any appointment that too at Rama Janma Bhumi Trust. Moreover, Trust is not a State under Article 12 of Constitution of India.
The contentions opposed by ASG, agreeing with this the bench observed that the court is of the view that the petitioner has no right to seek any appointment as Chief Engineer. Therefore, petitioner’s request is to appoint him as Chief Engineer for a period of three years at Sri Rama Janma Bhumi theertha Kshethra.
The bench further added that for issuance of writ of mandamus one has to establish his legal right and corresponding legal duty on the authority to consider one’s request. No relief could be granted in this writ petition, since the petitioner has no right and respondent has no duty to consider petitioner’s request.
