AMIT KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was the writ petitioner who had filed Writ-A No.14869 of 2019 (Amit Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and others) wherein he had challenged the impugned order dtd. 27/9/2018 whereby the respondent authorities had rejected his representation seeking joining service dtd. 5/10/2017 and as a consequence, his services were dispensed with. The writ court by means of judgment and order dtd. 10/5/2023 dismissed the writ petition on the premise that the writ petitioner had not completed his probation period and had left the service without sanction of leave and wanting to re-join the service after a gap of five years was not justified. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the instant intra court appeal assailing the judgment and order dtd. 10/5/2023.

(2.) It is the case of the appellant that he was not provided with an opportunity of hearing and even though the appellant was a temporary employee on probation yet his services could not be dispensed with without holding an appropriate inquiry.

(3.) It was also pointed out that the order dtd. 27/9/2018 is stigmatic in nature and the same cannot be sustained as it was not open for the respondent to have dispensed the service of the appellant by a stigmatic order and without holding a regular inquiry and this aspect of the matter has not been appropriately considered by the learned Single Judge who dismissed the writ petition.