RAHUL SHRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE similar question of facts and law are involved in these batch of petitions, on the joint request of the parties, matters are heard analogously and decided by this common order.

(2.) THE petitioners were appointed as Gram Rojgar Sahayak in Janpad Panchayat, Seondha, District Datia. The appointment orders of petitioners dated 24.9.2012 are collectively filed as Annexure P-4. It is contended that pursuant to appointment orders, the petitioners joined as Gram Rojgar Sahayak and started functioning.

(3.) CRITICIZING the order dated 3.5.2013 (Annexure P-1), it is contended that the entire action is taken on the basis of some ex -parte report prepared by Commissioner, Gwalior Division. The said enquiry was conducted behind the back of the petitioners and no opportunity of any nature was given to them. On the basis of such ex -parte material collected behind the back of the petitioners, the impugned order of cancellation of the entire selection process is issued at apex level, which runs contrary to Clause 15 of the Scheme as well as the principles of natural justice.