MURUGESAN Vs. PRESIDENT KULANTHIRANPATTU PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side, the main petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) THE challenge in this petition is to the order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1 of 2008 dated 17.07.2008 terminating the petitioner with a prayer to quash the same.

(3.) PER contra, Mr.S.C.Herold Singh, learned Government Advocate submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order of termination passed by the first respondent. It is contended that the petitioner was given opportunity before passing the impugned order as admittedly, a show-cause notice was served on him. The learned counsel for the respondents would further contend that in spite of serving the show-cause notice, the petitioner has not chosen to give any explanation and as such, the first respondent come to the conclusion that the petitioner has nothing to explain in respect of the charges framed against him and accordingly, the impugned order of termination was passed. It is further contended that the petitioner is having an alternative remedy of preferring an appeal and as such, the writ petition itself is not maintainable.