RAJKUMAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner 'Lab Technician', having been appointed on contractual basis for every year till 2019-20, was not continued with his contractual service with effect from 1/4/2020. The petitioner was informed by the communication dtd. 31/3/2022 that his contractual service came to an end on 31/3/2020 and since it was decided to not renew it, it would not be renewed any further. He was relieved from the job by the respondent no.2.

(3.) On such non-renewal of the contractual service of the petitioner, the petitioner made an enquiry and learnt that submission of false report by the Committee of which Civil Surgeon, Wardha was a part that the performance of the petitioner was not satisfactory was the basis for the decision to not renew his contractual service. The petitioner laid his hand on a communication dtd. 23/10/2020 and also some other documents which indicated that the record was created against the petitioner regarding non-satisfactory performance of his contractual service. Therefore, the petitioner has also questioned the legality and correctness of the communication dtd. 23/10/2020.