NIYAMAT ALI ISLAMALI ANSARI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner for following reliefs:-

(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner who was given an appointment and was discharging his duty, all of a sudden has been removed from the service. It is submitted that the order of removal is a stigmatic order and therefore, before passing such order, the respondent authority ought to have given an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that though the appointment is of contractual nature still the action against the petitioner is being stigmatic and principles of natural justice ought to have been followed as the same are being violated. The order of termination is required to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) The Court has heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. The petitioner came to be appointed on 24/10/2017 as a Councilor on contractual basis. The said contract period was extended. The contract dtd. 20/9/2021 was for the period between 6/9/2021 to 5/8/2022, wherein duration of service was for a period of 11 months on several conditions which included one of the conditions being terminated by giving seven days notice for any indiscipline and breach of conditions of contract. From the record, it appears that on several occasions, the petitioner's service were found to be deficient and for that reason, the petitioner was issued notices and the petitioner had offered explanation also. The Court may refer to one such notice dtd. 14/9/2021 which called upon the petitioner to give explanation within two days for the misconduct alleged against the petitioner. Pursuant to which, the petitioner did give an explanation and thereafter, on 16/9/2022, show-cause notice came to be closed with reprimand. Again on 24/9/2021, for another misconduct, the petitioner was issued show-cause notice for repeating mistakes which the petitioner had committed on the earlier occasions to which the petitioner had given explanation. It is apparent that the show-cause notices have been issued to the petitioner and the case of the petitioner was taken up for consideration where the authorities found that the petitioner's work was not as per the requirement of the service profile. The authorities have observed with regard to his work as under:-