R.K. PIPLEWAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SIR Edward Coke has said :

(2.) THE petitioner filed writ petition before this Court on 3.5.1988 and the same was registered as Miscellaneous Petition No. 1742/88. Since the Government of Madhya Pradesh established the State Administrative Tribunal, as such the writ petition of the petitioner was transferred to the Tribunal, as petitioner was a Government servant and at the relevant point of time he was serving on the post of Stenographer. The petitioner on 26.3.1985 was served by an order, passed by S.P. Balaghat and by this order, his services were directed to be terminated after one month, since his services were no more required. This order was filed as document No. 4 in the writ petition. In the writ petition, the specific pleading of the petitioner is that there was no reason for terminating his services. A prayer was made in the writ petition for quashment of the impugned order dated 26.3.1985 (document No. 4).

(3.) IT has been canvassed by Shri R.K. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner that, indeed, the order, terminating the services is nothing, but is punitive in nature. According to the learned counsel, if the veil is lifted one can easily visualize that the order is stigmatic in nature and since no departmental enquiry was conducted, the order of termination could not have been passed. In this regard, he has invited my attention to Annexure R-2 dated 27.5.1985 filed along with the return.