K IYAPPAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner has filed the present writ petition, praying for a writ of certiorari, to quash the order of the first respondent, dated 1.5.99, bearing Ref.No.Na.Ka.N.A7/2218/99, directing the second respondent to cancel the petitioner's appointment as a Driver.

(3.) BASED on the said letter, the first respondent, without making any enquiry, had passed the impugned order, dated 1.5.99, addressed to the Commissioner of the second respondent Panchayat, directing him to cancel the appointment of the petitioner. The petitioner has stated that he had been appointed as a Driver of the second respondent Panchayat after having been sponsored by the District Employment Exchange, Cuddalore, and based on an interview conducted by the Appointment Committee. The decision to appoint the petitioner had been taken by the majority of the members of the Appointment Committee, as per section 53, of the Madras Panchayat Act, 1958. While so, it is illegal on the part of the first respondent to direct the second respondent to cancel the appointment of the petitioner as a driver of the second respondent Panchayat. The direction issued by the first respondent, by his order, dated 1.5.99, is arbitrary, contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.