🚨 High Court Order Ignored: A Contempt of Court Crisis at NHM, Uttar Pradesh
The National Health Mission (NHM) in Uttar Pradesh is facing a serious legal and transparency crisis following allegations that a High Court’s binding directive was willfully ignored, potentially constituting a case of Contempt of Court. The controversy centers on the massive 2022 recruitment drive for over 17,000 contractual vacancies and the subsequent failure of the NHM administration to comply with a judicial order directing them to consider the representations of aggrieved aspirants.
This defiance has not only stalled justice but has also triggered a formal Right to Information (RTI) request, seeking to hold officials accountable for their inaction and the alleged premature closure of vacancies.
The Heart of the Matter: 17,000+ Vacancies and a Ticking Waiting List
The dispute stems from the NHM Uttar Pradesh recruitment drive initiated via advertisement No. 642/SPMU/NHM/2022-23/6200, dated November 26, 2022. This drive aimed to fill more than 17,000 positions, including ANM, Staff Nurse, Lab Technician, and Pharmacist-Allopathic, across various NHM programs.
A crucial provision of the recruitment stipulated that the waiting list—a vital tool for maintaining recruitment continuity—would remain valid for six months from the declaration of the provisional result. This list was intended to be used to fill new vacancies, positions where selected candidates failed to join, or roles that became available during that crucial half-year period.
The High Court’s Binding Command
The recruitment process and the status of the waiting list were challenged, leading to judicial intervention. The High Court of Judicature issued a clear, non-negotiable directive in WRIT-A No. 14572 of 2024 on October 21, 2024.
Neutral Citation No. 2024: AHC:167107
- This Court clarifies that it has not adjudicated the case on merits. Respondent No. 2 must pass an order after considering the relevant Rules and the facts of the case. Order Date :- 21.10.2024
The order was unambiguous: it was not a suggestion but a binding legal command for the concerned NHM official (Respondent No. 2) to “pass an order after considering” the rules, facts, and, crucially, the representations submitted by candidates from the waiting list. This directive was a mechanism to ensure fairness and rule-based governance, demanding a reasoned decision from the administration.
The Allegation of Defiance and the Contempt Threat
Despite the clear court order, the NHM director’s alleged subsequent action—or lack thereof—has ignited the controversy. According to reports, the official willfully disobeyed the court’s directive by running away from providing information to the information seeker and allegedly closing the vacancy without proper consideration.
When an official fails to “consider a representation” as ordered by a superior court, it’s not a procedural oversight; it is a potential case of Contempt of Court. This legal offense is a direct affront to the authority and majesty of the judiciary, carrying serious consequences, including fines and imprisonment, for the official responsible for the deliberate non-compliance. The court’s mandate was simple: review the case and pass an order. The failure to do even this minimum action demonstrates a concerning disregard for the rule of law.
The Accountability Mechanism: RTI Application Filed
In response to the alleged defiance and the lack of official transparency, Mr. Yogi M P Singh has filed an RTI application seeking crucial details on the compliance status and the handling of the waiting list. This move shifts the focus from the initial recruitment to the accountability of the officials mandated to execute the court’s order.
| RTI Application: Key Details | Information |
| Applicant Name | Yogi M P Singh |
| Registration Number | DIRMH/R/2024/62183 |
| Date of Filing | 09-11-2024 |
| Public Authority | Medical and Health Directorate |
| Application Status (as of 09/11/2024) | RTI REQUEST RECEIVED |
The Public Information Officer (PIO) of NHM, Uttar Pradesh, is now legally bound to provide a specific, point-wise response within the 30-day statutory period. The public staff, including Sartaj PIO, NHM Uttar Pradesh, who was named in the court order’s follow-up, is directly responsible for compiling and furnishing this information.
The Core Questions Demanding Official Response
The RTI application zeroes in on the three critical aspects of the case: the status of the recruitment, the use of the waiting list, and, most importantly, the compliance with the High Court order.
- Vacancies Filled: What is the total number of vacancies filled against the initial recruitment for 17,000+ posts?
- Waiting List Utilization: How many of these vacancies have been filled from the waiting list? This directly addresses the fairness to the candidates who were in reserve.
- High Court Order Compliance: What specific action has been taken by the public authority on the High Court order dated October 21, 2024? This is the most crucial question, aiming to establish if the official committed contempt.
- Representations: What action has the public authority taken on the representations submitted by aggrieved aspirants from the waiting list? The court specifically ordered these to be considered.
- Official Accountability: Please provide the names and designations of the public staff responsible for ensuring compliance with the aforementioned High Court order.
Seeking Transparency and Justice
This case transcends the typical procedural issues of a large-scale recruitment drive. It highlights a critical test of governance: Can a government official unilaterally ignore a direct, binding order from a High Court? The law states unequivocally that they cannot.
The RTI application serves as a necessary mechanism to pull back the curtain on the administrative process and force the officials to disclose their actions—or lack thereof—in the face of a judicial mandate. The refusal of the NHM Director to provide information and comply with the order has turned a grievance over a waiting list into a significant legal battle over institutional accountability and the supremacy of the judiciary. The next steps will likely involve not only the RTI response but also potential contempt proceedings, which will ultimately determine the accountability of the concerned officials.
Contact Details of Concerned Officials
| Role | Name/Designation | Contact |
| Public Information Officer (PIO) | Upmahaprabandhak NDC, National Health Mission | Phone: 9452867571, Email: jansuchnaadhikariupnhm@gmail.com |
| Nodal Officer | Director Health | Email: dgmhsrti@gmail.com |
Would you like me to search for any updates regarding the NHM’s response to the RTI application or the High Court’s action on the potential Contempt of Court case?
Information sought from CPIO High court of Judicature at Allahabad concerning working of Registrar General
Public information officer, Lucknow development authority did not provide any information regarding non-compliance of high court order
Facing a similar challenge? Share the details in the box below, and our team of experts will do their best to help.