STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JITENDRA SAVAJIBHAI SORATHIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, appellants- original respondents have assailed the judgment and order passed by learned Single Judge on 3/10/2019 in Special Civil Application No.14589 of 2019.

(2.) Background of facts which has given rise to present Letters Patent Appeal is that original petitioner, i.e. respondent herein, was appointed as Surveyor Class-III and was initially posted at Surat Branch. Petitioner was appointed on 10/11/2014 for a fixed period of 5 years on a fixed salary and appointment was purely on contractual basis. Services of the petitioner came to be terminated on account of reason of his involvement in criminal case at a relevant point of time, which was registered before DCB Police Station, Surat on 2/4/2019 for offences punishable under Ss. 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 , 472, 474, 120(B) and 114 of Indian Penal Code and was arrested on 13/4/2019. Said involvement was treated by authority as violation of one of the conditions of contractual appointment and in view of the guidelines and keeping in view the Government Resolution, services of original petitioner were put to an end on 21/5/2019 by the Chief Town Planner, Gandhinagar and it is this order of termination which was made the subject matter of challenge in the main writ petition. Said petition came up for consideration before learned Single Judge on 3/10/2019 and by a detailed order, after hearing both learned advocates, learned Single Judge keeping in view the proposition of law was pleased to allow the petition with certain riders and it is against this order, present Letters Patent Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent has been filed.

(3.) Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Jayneel Parikh appearing on behalf of appellants has submitted that order passed by learned Single Judge is not in consonance with the settled proposition of law. Original petitioner was purely on a contractual basis and moment there appears to be any violation of condition of employment, it is always open for the authority to terminate the services. On the contrary, same can be even without service of notice. According to Mr. Parikh, guidelines have been prescribed by Government Resolution on 28/3/2016 and when petitioner's involvement was in a serious commission of crime, as stated above, right of termination cannot be curtailed by learned Single Judge by allowing the petition and as such order being suffering from vice of non-application of mind, be set aside.