SALIMMUDDIN YASINBAIG MIRZA MSC LLM Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by Legal Department, State of Gujarat, dated 3.3.2004 and 21.6.2004. The aforesaid orders are finding place at Annexure 'M' Collectively, at pages 50 and 51 of the compilation. By the aforesaid orders, the petitioner was informed that he is not entitled to lien on the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor, and accordingly, he was not given charge of the aforesaid post of Assistant Public Prosecutor.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor initially for a period of two years on probation. [The petitioner has not produced a copy of the order appointing him as Assistant Public Prosecutor]. However, the petitioner has produced a copy of the order dated 25.1.2001 wherefrom it appears that the petitioner had resumed his charge on the said post on 7.4.1997. The said order further states that on satisfactory completion of the probation period, he was continued as Assistant Public Prosecutor on a long term basis.

(3.) As per the averments made in the petition, by order dated 28.6.2000, the petitioner was appointed as Civil Judge [JD] and JMFC on probation initially for a period of two years, which was further extended for a period of one year. Ultimately, the services of the petitioner were terminated by notification of the Legal Department dated 8.12.2003, and the petitioner was relieved from the post of Civil Judge [JD] and JMFC w.e.f. 10.12.2003. In paragraph 2.6 of the petition, the petitioner has averred that the petitioner made an application to the Legal Department on 11.12.2003 requesting to appoint the petitioner on the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor as his lien on the said post is continued in view of Circular dated 6.12.1997. In paragraph 2.8, the petitioner further averred that by letter dated 15.12.2003, the petitioner requested the Collector to appoint him as Assistant Public Prosecutor. In paragraph 2.9 of the petition, the petitioner has averred that by order dated 15.12.2003, the respondent No.1 gave him charge of 5th Joint Court and Juvenile Court at Surat. In paragraph 2.10, it is averred by the petitioner that by order dated 20.12.2003, the petitioner was informed that in pursuance of the written representation of Shri H.D. Virani, who was earlier holding the charge of 5th Joint Court and Juvenile Court, the petitioner cannot be given charge of Assistant Public Prosecutor till further instructions are received from the Legal Department. Ultimately, after calling for some explanation from the petitioner, as stated in paragraph 2.16 of the petition, by letter dated 21.6.2004, the petitioner was informed that circular dated 6.12.1997 is not applicable to the petitioner and therefore he cannot be reinstated on the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor. Along with the said letter a copy of letter dated 3.3.2004 was also forwarded which also states that the resolution dated 6.12.1997 is not applicable to the petitioner and therefore, letter dated 15.12.2003 by which the petitioner was given charge of Assistant Public Prosecutor is cancelled. Being aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner has filed this petition.