RAJU SHAMRAO KHOLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of Mr. Anand Parchure, learned Counsel for petitioner and Mr. Mujumdar, learned A. G. P. for respondent.

(2.) THE Writ Petition is directed against the impugned communication dated 26-6-2006 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, Home Department (Special), mumbai in exercise of power under Clause (2) of sub-section 2 (A) of section 2 of the Bombay Home Guards Act, 1947 whereby the service of the petitioner stands terminated after expiry of period of one month from the date on which the said notice was served on the petitioner.

(3.) MR. Parchure has submitted that the petitioner was appointed as District Commandant (Home Guards) for the District of nagpur vide order dated 2-8-2003 issued by the respondent No. 1 for a period of 5 years. Petitioner assumed charge of the post on 7-4-2003. It is contended that a frivolous complaint was filed against the petitioner for the offence punishable under sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was granted interim by the Competent Criminal court in the said crime. The learned Counsel for the petitioner further contended that the respondents by impugned notice/order terminated the services of the petitioner without giving any reasons whatsoever as well as without following the principles of natural justice and, therefore, the impugned notice/ order being violative of principles of natural justice cannot be sustained in law.