SUKHCHAIN JHARIYA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner no. 1 was appointed as a 'Home Guard Sainik' in the year 1998. Thereafter, on 30/07/2009, services of the petitioner were terminated without issuing any notice and without giving any opportunity of hearing. Petitioner has therefore filed the writ petition being W.P. No. 3545/2014 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 29/05/2014 thereby directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner.

(2.) Thereafter, respondents have passed the order dated 29/05/2014 thereby rejecting the representation submitted by the petitioner. Being aggrieved by that order, petitioner has filed the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the point involved in this case is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar Rajput Vs. District Commandant and another passed in W.P. No. 17334/2006 (s) decided on 3/05/2012 as well as the order passed in the case of State of M.P. and others Vs. Kishan Singh Chouhan (S.A. No. 349/2005). He further submits that the respondents had terminated the services of 11 Home Guards and out of which 9 persons have been reinstated except petitioner no. 1. He therefore submits that the petitioner being the similarly situated employee, the same benefit be extended to the petitioner also.