KHEDA DISTRICT PANCHAYAT Vs. PRAKASHBHAI GOVINDBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have filed this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent challenging the order dated 23.01.2017 passed in Special Civil Application No.855 of 2004, whereby the learned Single Judge quashed and set aside order dated 09.01.2004 passed by respondent No.2 terminating the services of the writ petitioner.

(2.) The challenge in the writ petition is based on various grounds, including that the respondents have failed to follow procedure of law for terminating services of the writ petitioners as envisaged under Rule 6 of Gujarat Panchayat Services [Discipline & Appeal] Rules, 1997 and breach of principles of natural justice inasmuch as the inquiry of preliminary in nature which was held by respondent with regard to certificate obtained by them for the for the course of Tailoring in Women's and Children's Garments [for short, 'TCWCG'] in the year 1984 was not genuine since it was not issued by the recognized institution. That copy of such report based on inquiry was not given to the petitioner and unless full-fledged departmental inquiry was envisaged under the Rules, no order terminating their services could have been passed. The learned Single Judge referred to facts of service conditions of the writ petitioner and found that the petitioner had worked satisfactorily for about 15 years and no complaint about his work during the period when he served was received by the respondent and during period of service he also appeared in the very examination i.e. TCWCG conducted by Technical Examination Board, State of Gujarat and passed out. That alleged irregularity was noticed by respondent after a period of 7 to 8 years from the date of joining of service and subsequent to that also no such departmental inquiry was instituted. Earlier the writ petition was filed being Special Civil Application No.2945 of 1993 and upon a statement made by learned counsel for the panahcyat, that writ petition came to be dismissed so as to provide opportunity of hearing in accordance with law.

(3.) For the sake of convenience, we refer to brief facts of Special Civil Application No.855 of 2004 so recorded in para 2, as under: