M D PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . Rule. Learned Addl. Govt. Pleader Mr. Dave waives service on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) . The question at this stage is whether an employee who is dismissed from service on the ground of corruption, serious misconduct or lack of honesty and litegrity should be foisted on the department without setting aside the dismissal order. There is no law that as soon as the matter is admitted, interim relief should be granted in such a manner that without deciding that the impugned order is illegal and void the Court should permit the petitioner to continue in service by granting interim relief and permit him to commit some further misdeeds. Presuming that even if he does not commit further misdeeds, the order imposing penalty cannot be set aside even temporarily till the petition is decided. In the rarest of rare cases the Court may exercise such jurisdiction. Further, if the petition is finally allowed, then the order of reinstatement with full back wages can be passed and the petitioner would not suffer any loss. As against this, if the order passed by the departmental authority holding the petitioner guilty of charges of corruption or other serious misconduct, is stayed without deciding it, it may result in serious prejudice to the society at large and the administration may suffer irreparable loss which cannot be imagined and remedied subsequently by the Court.

(3.) . However, Mr. Oza, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, vehemently submitted that this Court should grant interim relief staying the dismissal order because the Enquiry Officer has not given sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.