Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]latest-news-updates/hc-bench-ruling-on-gram-rozgar-sewaks-to-benefit-rural-youth-5866.html"/> LATEST NEWS UPDATES | HC bench ruling on gram rozgar sewaks to benefit rural youth | Im4change.org
Resource centre on India's rural distress
 
 

HC bench ruling on gram rozgar sewaks to benefit rural youth

A division bench of the Allahabad High Court has held that the government order issued on August 25 for holding a fresh selection for the appointment of `gram rozgar sewak' (village employment worker) after every three years, is constitutional and within the legislative competence of the state government.

Through the order, the court has set aside the single judge order in a special appeal filed by the state government through principal secretary, gram vikas. The single judge had turned down paragraph 4 of the said government order, terming it arbitrary and unreasonable. The single judge had further directed to renew such work of gram rozgar sewak after expiry of such period for one year at a time subject to satisfactory work.

The ruling was given by a division bench of Justice Amitava Lala and Justice Surendra Singh in an appeal filed by the state government, challenging the single judge order. Appearing for the state, additional advocate general V K Singh, assisted by M C Chaturvedi, chief standing counsel, had contended before the court that the government order was issued to achieve the goal of employment guaranteed to the poor adults under  MGNREGA. The court, in its long judgment, said that Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) was formulated with the object to provide at least minimum number of employment to the maximum number of rural adults for the enhancement of livelihood security of the households in rural areas of the country by providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in every financial year.

In order to implement the employment guaranteed scheme under MGNREGA, the state government had issued a government order on August 25, 2010, by providing a condition that the persons who are to be deployed as gram rozgar sewak, will be deployed to a maximum period of three years and thereafter new one will be selected and deployed to discharge similar work. The government order also mentioned that at the time of fresh selection, the authority concerned will also consider the nature of work discharged by the erstwhile gram rozgar sewak to give preference, if any. Clause 4 of this government order was challenged before the single judge by the petitioner and the single judge had turned down the provisions of holding the fresh selections for the appointment of gram rozgar sewak.

Allowing the state's appeal and setting aside the single judge order, the court remarked: "According to us, the court can't strike down a policy decision taken by the government merely because it feels that another policy decision would have been fairer or wiser or more scientific or logical."

The judges further held that in the instant case, interest of the respondents -- writ petitioners -- has been taken care of against the interest of the general public. Therefore, decision of the learned single judge is unsustainable in nature. Some sort of relief has been given by the government to the poorer section of the people of the rural area. The guarantee of 100 days work is already there. If one is directed to continue by renewing his service, then his service will be as good as regular service and contrary to the intention of the Legislature to provide 100 days work to others. There should be a check and balance. Therefore, under no circumstances, the condition, which has been imposed, under the relevant government order can be said to be wrong and the engagement of persons under such scheme can be equated with regular service-holders.