STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAHUL AYDANBHAI VANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent challenging oral order dated 05.09.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenged the order of termination dated 23.09.2016 passed by respondent being illegal, perverse and contrary to law and further to direct respondent authority to reinstate the petitioner on his original post with continuity of service and all consequential benefits flowing therefrom as if the order of termination was never passed.

(2.) Certain facts recorded by the learned Single Judge in paragraphs no. 3 & 3.1 are not in dispute and accordingly we reproduce the same hereinbelow:

(3.) Before the learned Single Judge, contentions were raised by learned advocate for the petitioner about stigma attached to the petitioner by passing the impugned order of termination which in extenso referred to various misconducts on the part of the petitioner which formed the basis rather foundation of passing the order of termination and by learned Assistant Government Pleader about unsatisfactory work on the part of the petitioner employee and terms and conditions of the contractual employment based on G.R. dated 06.10.2011 issued on 08.08.2013 which specifically mentioned about 5 years of fixed term appointment in a fixed salary and discretion was conferred upon the employer to terminate the services of the petitioner by issuing one month notice or in lieu thereof pay for such period. However, the learned Single Judge by referring to various decisions of the Apex Court, contents of misconduct referred to in order of termination and relying on the pleadings filed in the petition, concluded about order of termination attaching stigma and allowed the petition with reliefs prayed therein.