PAWAN KUMAR PATIDAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REGARD being had to the similitude in the controversy involved in the matter, the above cases were heard analogously together and a common order is being passed. The facts of W.P. No.4735/2008(s) are being narrated as under :

(2.) THE petitioner before this Court has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 27.3.2006, by which his appointment has been cancelled without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents/State has argued before this court that the name of the petitioner was not forwarded by the Employment Exchange and the application was submitted by the petitioner based upon the advertisement affixed at the Gram Panchayat Office. He has further stated that the petitioner's name was not included in the list forwarded by the Employment Exchange. An enquiry took place in the matter and based upon the enquiry report as it was established that the name of the petitioner was not found in the list forwarded by the employment exchange, the impugned order dated 26.7.2008 has been passed.