MERANBEN ALABELIBHAI NAGORI Vs. JAIL SUPRINTENDENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner i.e. Meranben Alabelibhai Nagori under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the respondents to absorb the petitioner on a permanent basis as Matron, Sub Jail, Surendranagar with all consequential benefits and further, to declare the impugned action of the respondent No. 1 in orally relieving the petitioner from the post of Matron, Sub Jail, Surendranagar as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 311 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) By amendment effected as per the order of the Court dated 28-2-2001 the petitioner has further prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 8-1-2001 passed by respondent No.l annexed at Annexure "E" to the petition whereby the respondents have not selected the petitioner as Matron since she did not fulfil the eligibility criteria regarding age and, order dated 9-1-2001 annexed at Annexure "F" to the petition whereby the services of the petitioner have been terminated.

(3.) Briefly stated, the facts as narrated in the writ petition are that the petitioner submitted an application to be appointed as Matron for lady prisoners in the Sub Jail at Surendrangar on 15-1-1983 through the Employment Exchange. It is the case of the petitioner that after being called for an interview she was appointed on a purely temporary basis as Matron for the lady prisoners at the Sub Jail at Surendranagar. The appointment order of the petitioner dated 13-5-1983 is annexed at Annexure "B" to this petition. According to the averments made in the petition, the petitioner performed the duties of Matron at the Sub Jail at Surendranagar with effect from 13-5-1983, as and when the lady prisoners were brought to the Jail, and she continued to work upto 31-3-1997, on which date her services were orally terminated by the respondent No.1, relieving her from duty with immediate effect. The petitioner has, therefore, challenged this action of the respondents by way of the present petition.