KU. MAMTA MARIUM MASIH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the order Annexure (P-3) dated 23/06/2014 and Annexure(P-4) dated 09/07/2015 passed by the learned Commissioner, District Durg whereby the revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by the Collector on 09/07/2015 Annexure (P-4) rejecting the appeal on the revision of the petitioner filed against the order of termination has been rejected.

(2.) The facts of the case is that, the petitioner was appointed as a Shiksha Karmi-Grade-III under Janpad Panchayat, Berla, District Bemetara vide order dated 26/09/2007 Annexure-P/1. The petitioner immediately assumed the office as a Siksha Karmi and continued to work till the services of the petitioner was abruptly terminated vide order dated 23/06/2014 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Berla, District Bemetara. The said order was questioned by the petitioner before the learned Collector, Bemetara in an appeal under Section 91 and the Collector vide his order dated 09/07/2015 dismissed the said appeal.

(3.) According to the petitioner that the impugned order of termination as also the order passed by the Appellate Authority as well as is bad in law for the reason that, the termination of the petitioner was in total violation of Rule 7 o the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. He further submits that, the law in this regard is by now well settled by a catena of decisions wherein it has been held that for the purpose of terminating an employee whose services are governed under the Rules of 1999, the respondent authorities are required to comply with the procedure prescribed under Rule 7. Having not done so, the impugned order is liable to be set-aside on this ground.