SURENDRA NATH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DILIP Gupta, J. The quashing of the order dated 27th September, 2005 passed by the learned District Judge, Hamirpur terminating the services of the petitioners who were serving as Chaukidars in District Judgeship, Hamirpur has been sought in all the three petitions and, therefore, they have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment.

(2.) I have heard Sri Vikas Budhwar learned Counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 68129 of 2005 and Writ Petition No. 68131 of 2005 while Sri V. K. Agnihotri learned Counsel has appeared for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 69060 of 2005. On behalf of the District Judge, Hamirpur, Sri Rajiv Gupta has made his submissions while the learned Standing Counsel has made his submission on behalf of the State of U. P. Sri M. P. S. Chauhan has put in appearance on behalf of Sri Ratnakar Dixit the then District Judge, Hamirpur.

(3.) SRI Om Prakash, who has filed Writ Petition No. 69060 of 2005, claims to have been appointed as a temporary Chaukidar by the District Judge, Hamirpur by means of the order dated 15th February, 2005. He was thereafter transferred as Orderly by means of the order dated 31st March, 2005. A show-cause notice dated 6th September, 2005 was issued by the District Judge, Hamirpur calling upon him to explain why his services should not be terminated as there was no vacancy to the post of Chaukidar when he had been appointed on 15th February, 2005. A reply to the aforesaid show-cause notice was filed by the petitioner on 21st September, 2005 and thereafter the order dated 27th September, 2005 was passed terminating the services of the petitioner on the ground that there was no vacancy on the post of Chaukidar when the petitioner was appointed.