SUNIL KUMAR SINGH Vs. SUB- DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE BANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. B. Misra, J. By means of Writ Petition No. 35115 of 1998 petitioner has prayed to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the salary of the petitioner, since July 1997 continuously and by means of Writ Petition No. 9678 of 1999 the petitioner has challenged the order of termination dated 10-3-1999 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) and further prayed that the respondents be restrained from the peaceful functioning of the petitioner as Clerk in the Nagar Palika Parishad, Atarra, District Banda. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE facts relating to Writ Petition No. 35115 of 1998 are as follows:- In the year 1996, a substantive post of clerk was fallen vacant in the Nagar Parishad, Atarra, on account of incumbent of the post, due to resignation of Laxmi Prasad. However Shri Satish Chandra Awasthi Head Clerk of the said Nagar Palika Parishad, made a recommendation to the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Atarra that de to resignation of Laxmi Prasad proper functioning of Nagar Palika Parishad is being effected, therefore a fresh recruitment may be made on the substantive post. On the recommendation made by Sri Satish Chandra Awasthi, the Executive Officer, wrote a letter to the Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, requesting to constitute the Selection Committee for making a selection on substantive post of Class III. A public notice was published, inviting the application from the eligible candidates and a selection Committee was constituted by the Chairman, containing 3 members, namely Smt. Rama Singh Rathor, Sri Sanjai Singh, Smt. Shiv Devi Soni. THEreafter a selection list was prepared and accordingly the interview letter was issued to 6 candidates, namely Ram Saran son of Judi Raikwar, Ram Pratap son of Malkhan, Kamla Kant Srivastava son of Onkar Srivastava, Sunil Kumar Singh (Petitioner) son of Sri Ganesh Bux Singh, Om Prakash son of Ganesh Prasad Srivastava, Ajai Singh son of late Girja Singh. All the abovementioned candidates, who were invited for interview, appeared before the Interview Board. THE Selection Committee declared the result, and petitioner was found suitable candidate and accordingly he was selected as Clerk, the Selection Committee on 3-3-1997 had recommended the name of the petitioner to the Chairman and appointment letter was issued on 6-3-1997, the petitioner submitted his joining report to the Executive Officer on 8-3-1997 and as contended since then he is regularly performing his duties. In meeting of the Board of Nagar Palika Parishad, Atarra, held on 21-3-1997, the appointment of the petitioner was approved by proposal No. 10 (1) as evident from Annexure-4 of Writ Petition No. 9678, however, the petitioner was not paid salary since 1997, hence he filed present writ petition.

(3.) THE petitioner also filed Writ Petition No. 9678 of 1999, for quashing the illegal termination order dated 10-3-1999 mainly on the following grounds: (a) Absolutely no notice or opportunity, whatsoever, has ever been given to the petitioner before passing the order dated 19 February, 1999, 10-3-1999. As such the order impugned is violative to the principles of Natural Justice. (b) THE impugned order has been passed behind the back of the petitioner. Neither any enquiry has been contemplated against the petitioner nor any explanation has been called, as such the order impugned, is wholly illegal, erroneous and unwarranted. (c) THE respondents did not comply with the order dated 10-11- 1998 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 35115 of 1998. Neither any communication has been made to the petitioner, nor they have decided the representation of the petitioner. (d) During the pendency of the Writ Petition No. 35115 of 1998, before this Court the order of termination dated 10-3-1999 is wholly arbitrary, unjustified. (e) THE petitioner's appointment was made, after adopting due process, prescribed under the law, statute and Act and the Chairman issue the appointment letter, exercising the power as mentioned under Rule 74 of U. P. Municipalities Act and accordingly the approval was granted by the Board.