BHUPENDRA SINGH GURJAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, under Article 226 of Constitution of India, has been filed seeking the following relief (s):

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was holding the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak in Gram Panchayat Kunarpura, Janpad Panchayat Pahadgarh, District Morena (M.P.). It is submitted that at the relevant point of time, petitioner was posted as Gram Rozgar Sahayak in aforesaid Gram Panchayat and was discharging his duty sincerely and honestly. Respondent No.- 3 gave him the additional charge of Gram Panchayat Tiktoli as in-charge supervisor on 27/3/2017. It is submitted that on the basis of false allegation made against petitioner, Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Morena issued a notice dtd. 21/7/2017. In the aforesaid notice the allegations were imposed against petitioner that the toilets are not constructed and the amount of toilets has been paid to beneficiaries. Petitioner filed reply to the said show-cause notice and stated that Chandrapal Singh Kushwah Gram Rojgar Sahayak of Gram Panchayat Tiktoli is responsible for the construction of Toilets and after that co-ordinator of Janpad Panchayat verified the fact regarding construction of Toilets and it was the duty of gram rojgar sahayak to upload the photograph of the constructed Toilets and to send on the login I.D. of co-ordinator. Thus, there is no fault on the part of petitioner regarding payment of Toilets to the beneficiaries. Inspite of that petitioner recovered the amount from concerned beneficiaries and deposited the same in the account of Janpad Panchayat Morena. Thereafter, Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Pahadgarh, District Morena who approved the amount but no action was taken against him. It is submitted that no regular departmental enquiry has been conducted. Only on the basis of fact finding/preliminary/ex parte enquiry in which petitioner was neither heard nor was given opportunity of hearing nor was issued a show cause notice to produce his defence and by recording statements of witnesses, ex parte, without giving any opportunity of cross-examination in that enquiry, the services of petitioner have been terminated by non-speaking, unreasoned and stigmatic order dtd. 10/8/2017. Thereafter, petitioner preferred appeal before the Appellate Authority, however, Appellate Authority did not consider the aforesaid aspect and rejected the appeal so preferred by petitioner. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that impugned order dtd. 10/8/2017 (Annexure P-1) has been issued by the Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Pahadgarh as per the directions received from Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Morena. It is further submitted that as per the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Joint Action Committee of AIR Line Pilots' Association of India (ALPAI) And Others Vs. Director General of Civil Aviation And Others reported in (2011) 5 SCC 435 if any decision is taken by a statutory authority at the behest or on suggestion of a person who had no statutory role to play, the same would be patently illegal. It is submitted that the competent authority has not applied its mind and only on the basis of recommendation/direction issued by Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Morena passed the impugned order which is contrary to the settled position or contrary to the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Joint Action Committee of AIR Line Pilots' Association of India (ALPAI) And Others (supra).

(3.) Per contra, it is submitted by learned counsel for respondent/State and respondent No.3 that in pursuance of the policy issued by the State Government, as per Clause-17, petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy of filing Second Appeal before the Appellate Authority which has not been availed and exhausted by petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner was employed on contractual basis and therefore before terminating his services a preliminary enquiry was conducted by the respondents and thus, the alleged impugned order dtd. 10/8/2017 is correct and as per law. It is further submitted that in the enquiry along with petitioner one Chandrapal Singh Kushwah Gram Rojgar Sahayak, Shekhar Sharma - Block Co-ordinator were also found to be involved in the misappropriation of public funds. Further, it is also submitted that FIR (Annexure R-2) bearing Crime No. 17/2017 before Police Station - Nirar, District Morena was also registered. Learned counsel for respondents placed reliance on order dtd. 3/9/2025 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Gwalior in WP.No.30659/2024 [Rajbeer Singh Gurjar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh And Others] and on order dtd. 19/9/2025 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat Jabalpur in WP.No.21686/2023 [Manish Kumar Tiwari Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh And Others] submitting that no relief can be granted to petitioner and prayed for dismissal of instant petition.