LAWS(CHH)-2006-4-23

LAXMAN PRASAD MISHRA Vs. KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI

Decided On April 17, 2006
LAXMAN PRASAD MISHRA Appellant
V/S
KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the impugned order dated 1-7-1996 (Annexure P/3) whereby the Petitioner was demoted to the post of Nakedar on the ground that the Petitioner was not having the minimum qualification i.e. matric pass for appointment on the post of Lower Division Clerk.

(2.) THE Petitioner was initially appointed as Peon/Chowkidar on 1-7-1973 thereafter the Petitioner was promoted to the post of Nakedar on 9-11-1976. THE Petitioner was further promoted to the post of Lower Division Clerk on 14-5-1981 (Annexure P/1) with a condition that if the Petitioner failed to produce Matric Examination Certificate within a period of one year, the Petitioner would be demoted to the post of Nakedar. THE Petitioner could not pass the required examination of matric within a period of one year. During the course of hearing, a document dated 18-1-1983 was produced by counsel for the Respondent showing that the promotion order passed earlier was cancelled and the Petitioner was demoted to the post of Nakedar. THE order dated 18-1-1983 was neither filed along with the reply nor was supported by an affidavit of its authenticity. Despite the order dated 18-1-1983, the impugned order dated 1-7-1996 was passed, which is under challenge in this petition. However, the Petitioner was allowed to continue on the post of Lower Division Clerk, contrary to the condition No. 3 of the promotion order dated 14-5-1981 and order dated 18-1-1983 for about a period of 15 years. THE Respondent woke up from its slumber and passed the order of demotion on 1-7-1996 (Annexure P/3) without affording an opportunity of hearing or without issuing any show cause notice to the Petitioner.

(3.) MISS Samta Jain, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Shri R.S. Marhas, counsel for the Respondent admits the fact that the Petitioner was allowed to continue for 15 years despite the condition No. 3 in the promotion order dated 14-5-1981 whereby the Petitioner was required to pass matric examination within a period of one year. It was further admitted that the impugned order was passed without issuing show cause notice or affording any opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, though the Petitioner has acquired the right after working on the post of Lower Division Clerk for more than 15 years.