MOINUDDIN Vs. NAGAR PALIKA NIGAM RATLAM & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner before this Court, who is a daily wager, has filed present petition being aggrieved by order of termination dated 13/01/2017. The petitioner's contention is that he was working with the respondents for the last 28 years and has been thrown out of the job without conducting any inquiry. The petitioner's contention is that only a show cause notice was issued and thereafter, the petitioner has categorically denied all the allegations levelled against him and in spite of his denial, his 28 years' of unblemished service has not been looked into and he has been thrown out of the

(2.) A detailed and exhaustive reply has been filed in the matter and it has been stated that large number of irregularities were committed by the petitioner and in those circumstances after conducting a fact finding inquiry, the services of the petitioner has been put to an end.

(3.) This Court has carefully gone through the show cause notice as well as the reply filed by the petitioner. The impugned order passed in the present case is certainly a stigmatic order. The petitioner came up with a specific plea that in order to save a contractor, who was required for updating the data, he has been made a scapegoat. It has also been stated that he was purely a daily wager not a professional who knew computer science nor he was a professional expert in the filed of IT, he was simply a daily wager and the entire burden has been shifted upon the petitioner in respect of irregularities.