BIPINKUMAR JIVANLAL SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge has been made by the petitioner to the order dated 7th July, 1997 of the respondents under which his services were terminated.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been given the appointment on compassionate ground and the appointment has been taken back under the garb of termination of services on the ground that the fact disclosed by him regarding the income of his family was not found true but before passing such an order, the petitioner has not been given the opportunity of hearing.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, contended that the petitioner's mother is already in service and as such, it cannot be said to be a case where the petitioner should have been given the appointment on compassionate ground. The petitioner is claiming the appointment on compassionate ground as a source of recruitment which is not correct.