V.V.MOHANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:-

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5.

(3.) It is submitted that the petitioner was appointed on contract basis under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme on 25.02.2009. The contract was for a period of two years, but it was renewed from time to time. The last contract was valid till 05.06.2020. It is submitted that on the basis of certain fake complaints raised before the 2nd respondent, an enquiry had been conducted by the 2nd respondent. On the basis of the report submitted, the Block Panchayat Secretary had censured the petitioner. It is stated that, thereafter, another report was submitted by a junior officer and it was found that the complaints raised were fake and pseudonymous. However, by Exhibit P4, it was recommended to terminate the petitioner from employment. It is submitted that the Block Panchayat Committee had elaborately discussed the matter and found that Exhibit P4 report was ill motivated. Ext.P5 resolution was passed by the Block Panchayat seeking dropping of the proceedings against the petitioner. However, the petitioner's service was terminated without any hearing or show cause notice. It is stated that the petitioner had filed a representation before the Government and the Government directed the Assistant Development Commissioner to conduct an enquiry and submit a report. It is stated that such a report was submitted and the Government considered the same and directed the 2nd respondent to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. The petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P. (C).No.5492/2020 and direction was issued to the 2 nd respondent to consider the representation preferred by the petitioner. However, the 5th respondent considered the issue and passed Exhibit P17 Resolution deciding not to reinstate the petitioner and to fill up the post by appointing fresh candidates without reinstating the petitioner and without considering his request as directed by this Court.