ASHOKBABU JADUVANSHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Ashokbabu Jaduvanshi, an ex-Process Writer on the establishment of the District Court, Jhabua, has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of termination of his services (Annexure 'c') dated 6-3-1985, passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Jhabua, on the ground that the services of the petitioner are terminated with effect from 6-3-1985 as no longer required.

(2.) IT is common ground that the petitioner belongs to Class-Ill category of employees. He was appointed on 26-8-1982 as Process Writer until further orders, with a condition that he would appear for interview when held and in the event of the petitioner's being unsuccessful in the interview, he would be relieved, without notice (Order dated 26-8-1982, Annexure 'a' ). Thereafter, he was attached in the Record Section till 15-7-1984 and then posted vide order No. 302 dated 12-7-1984, as Process Writer, where he continued to work as such till 28-2-1985. The petitioner was arrested by police, Jhabua on charges under section 302/201, Indian Penal Code on 1-3-1985 and was in district Jail, Jhabua, till 13-5-1985 when he was released on bail by the order of the High Court dated 9-5-1985. While in Jail, he was served an order of suspension passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Jhabua (respondent No. 2) on 5-3-1985 (Annexure 'b' ). The suspension order stated, that there is a report by the Town Inspector against the petitioner, who is a temporary public servant, of being arrested in Crime No. 31 of 1985 under section 302/201, Indian Penal Code and, therefore, under Rule 9 of the M. P. Civil Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter, referred to as "the Rules"), the petitioner is suspended. There is also no dispute that on the following day of the suspension order, i. e. on 6-3-1985, the District and Sessions Judge passed the impugned order Annexure 'c' stating that the services of the petitioner a temporary Process Writer on the establishment of the District and Sessions Judge, Jhabua, are terminated with effect from 6-4-1985 as no longer required.

(3.) THE petitioner's case is that he submitted an application on 13-5-1985 for reinstatement followed by the subsequent reminder dated 16-5-1985, but his application was dismissed by respondent No. 2, vide order dated 29-5-1985 (Annexure 'd' ). The impugned order is challenged mainly on the ground that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of being heard before passing of the impugned order; that the service of the order of suspension and termination of services on the same day is in violation of the provisions of the Rules; that before imposing a major penalty, i. e. removing him from service, he was not afforded an opportunity to show cause or of being heard; that the impugned order has been passed without holding an enquiry. Hence, the prayer is that the impugned order be quashed by a suitable writ or direction.