LAKHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Anil Bhushan, Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Amit Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

(2.) Petitioner came to be appointed Stenographer in 1982. By the instant writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order of termination dated 14 May 2007, passed by the fourth respondent, Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, District Firozabad. It is noted in the impugned order that petitioner vide order dated 18 November 2006, came to be attached to the office of Assistant Engineer, Mainpuri, and was relieved on 9 January 2007 for the place of posting/attachment. Petitioner neither reported at Mainpuri nor did he furnish any application for his absence. It appears that the petitioner was engaged in the electioneering of his wife who was contesting from Samta Party, consequently, the fourth respondent terminated the services of the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner makes two fold submission: (i) that the petitioner being a permanent government employee could not have been terminated by order simpliciter; (ii) provisions of U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999, was not followed; (iii) the principle of abandonment of service enshrined in Fundamental Rule 18 is not applicable in the instant case.