SHASHIDHARA. K. R. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order impugned in the appeal dtd. 6/3/2022 passed in W.P.No.18533/2022 (S-RES) by learned Single Judge, is unsustainable and as such prayed for allowing of the appeal.

(3.) The petitioner was before the learned Single Judge challenging the termination order dtd. 30/8/2022 passed by the fourth respondent. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submitted that petitioner was subjected to various show cause notices and he submitted detailed replies to the said notices. It is also the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant that the petitioner ought to have been granted an opportunity of an enquiry and after the outcome of the enquiry the respondents could have initiated further action. It is the submission of the learned counsel that the action of terminating the services of the petitioner to be treated as a punishment as dismissal from service. Though submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant looks very attractive, on perusal of the materials, particularly, the order of the learned Single Judge we are not able to accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the reasons that the principle prayers in the petition namely, clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the prayer indicates that the focus of the petitioner was seeking continuity of services or renewal of the services. Now if the order which was subject matter of the petition is perused which is at page 48 (Annexure-A) in the writ petition and it carries the title 'Termination of Contract' and the same refers to certain breach and violations of the terms of the contract committed by the appellant.