KANTIKUMAR BALUBHAI KATHARIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner ? a Night-Watchman working with the respondent authorities has prayed for the following reliefs :

(2.) THE case which has been set-up by the petitioner can be summed up thus :

(3.) IT appears that by way of affidavit-in-rejoinder an important fact has been brought to the notice of this Court. The fact is that the petitioner had also preferred a writ petition being Special Civil Application No.1325/2001. Record reveals that Special Civil Application No.1325/2001 had to be preferred as the petitioner was served with an order of termination dated 31/1/2001 and the order dated 1/2/2001 passed by the Sales-Tax Officer relieving the petitioner from the services. This petition was adjudicated by Division Bench of this High Court (Coram: R.M.Doshit and K.M.Thacker, JJ.) and came to be disposed of vide judgment and order dated 20/11/2008. IT appears that the challenge to the order of termination of petitioner?s service was on two grounds: first, the impugned order was passed in violation of provisions contained in Rule-33 of the Bombay Civil Service Rules, 1959, and secondly, the petitioner had been needed discriminatory treatment inasmuch as another Watchman Shri H.K.Purohit, junior to the petitioner, was continued in service. The contention in the Special Civil Application No.1325/2001 was that Rule-33 of the Rules permit the State Government to terminate service of a temporary employee by giving a notice in writing or by paying pay and allowances in lieu of Notice. The Division Bench allowed the petition observing as under :