PRABHANSHU TIWARI Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition against the order dated 18.03.2016 passed in O.A. No. 200/00337/2015 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur.

(2.) The Superintendent, Post Office, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur invited applications for Gramin Dak Sewa, Branch Dakpal at Post Office Aamahinota, Bhedaghat, Jabalpur vide notification dated 05.12.2013. The petitioner applied for the same and he was selected and appointed on the said post. After completion of training an appointment order was issued in favour of the petitioner on 27.11.2014 on the terms and conditions that the petitioner was selected and appointed at Gramin Dak Sewak, Branch Aamahinota, Bhedaghat, Jabalpur w.e.f. 15.11.2014 in the pay scale of Rs.2745-50-4245. The appointment of the petitioner was contract appointment and his services could be terminated by one month's notice and salary. The service rules for Postal Grmain Dak Seva (Conduct & Employment ) Rules 2001, (in short "The Rules of 2001") would be applicable in regard to conduct and service of the petitioner. The petitioner had accepted the terms and conditions and joined the services. The services of the petitioner were terminated, vide order dated 10.4.2015 with one month' s notice and salary.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the aforesaid act, the petitioner filed petition, i.e. O.A. No. 200/00337/2015 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bench at Jabalpur challenging the order of termination on the ground that the order is arbitrary and illegal and the petitioner had served in the department for a period of about six months and without any reason his services were terminated. The Department in its reply pleaded that the petitioner was engaged in accordance with the provisions of Rules of 2001, due to some mistake erroneous notification was issued in OC Category in Jabalpur Division for 29 posts and when mistake was pointed out. The Post Master General had taken a decision to cancel the notification of OC category. Consequently, the services of the petitioner were terminated in accordance with the Rules of 2001.