DILIP SINGH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the order dated 18.04.2017 whereby the services of the petitioner were terminated on the ground that the petitioner has been found negligent in performance of his duties.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that in pursuance to an advertisement issued by respondent No. 2 for appointment on the post of Sub Engineer on contract basis, the petitioner has submitted his application for appointment on the said post. The petitioner after facing the selection process was appointed on the post of Sub Engineer vide order dated 04.10.2012 and was posted at Janpad Panchayat, Sohagpur. Initially, the period of contract was for a period of one year, however, the same has been extended from time to time. The petitioner was discharging his duties with full dedication, however, the progress work by the Gram Panchayats and other agencies involved in the works were not satisfactory. Therefore, the petitioner has issued show cause notices from time to time.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 18.04.2017 issued by respondent No. 4 is illegal, arbitrary, malafide and in violation of the basic principles of natural justice. He submits that the petitioner has never shown any negligence in performance of his duties and he has never been issued any warning or counseling with regard to the deficiency in his performance. He further submits that the order is stigmatic in nature and such a stigmatic order cannot be passed and services cannot be terminated without holding a regular departmental enquiry. For the said purpose, he relied on the judgments passed by this Court in the cases of Rahul Tripathi Vs. Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission, 2001 (3) MPHT 397, Rajendra Tiwari alias Raju Vs. State of M.P. & others, 2005 (3) MPHT 69 and Jitendra Vs. State of M.P. & others, 2008 (5) MPHT 146.