STATE OF M. P. Vs. YOGESH PATHAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants/State has filed this appeal under Sec. 2 (1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyay Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 assailing the order dtd. 10/12/2020 passed by learned writ Court in W.P.No. 1621/2016; whereby, learned writ Court allowed the writ petitioner preferred by respondent/petitioner and directed reinstatement of respondent in service with all consequential benefits.

(2.) Precisely stated facts of the case are that respondent (hereinafter shall be referred as "petitioner") preferred a petition with the submissions that petitioner was selected on the post of Constable in year 2013 and after selection, petitioner was sent for training. Character verification of the petitioner was conducted. It appears that, petitioner remained absent for about 330 days on the pretext of ailment of his mother and thereafter his poor health, therefore, he did not join the training and despite the fact that information was given to him. In-charge, Training Centre, did not permit the petitioner to join after coming back from unauhorised leave and on 3/8/2015, his services were terminated on the ground of Regulation 59 of M.P. Police Regulation.

(3.) Petitioner preferred writ petition against the said order of termination and raised the ground of stigma attached to the said order and while relying upon judgments of Apex Court in the case of D.K.Yadav Vs. JMA Industries Ltd., (1993) 3 SCC 259 and Pavanendra Narayan Verma Vs. Sanjay Gandi PGI of Medical Sciences and Anr., (2002) 1 SCC 520, he raised the submission that termination order so passed without opportunity of hearing and conducting enquiry is bad in law.