SRI SANTOSH NAMA Vs. THE STATE OF TRIPURA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY-CUM-COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THE DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF TRIPURA, THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL AND THE HEADMASTER, CHARAKBAI HIGH SCHOOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner by means of this petition has challenged the notice dated 24th May 2005, issued by the Director of School Education to the petitioner terminating his services w.e.f. one month from the date of receiving notice.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the petitioner was engaged as Night Guard on contract basis on 31st May 1990. He joined duties and his service which was on contractual basis was extended from time to time. According to the petitioner, he was falsely involved in a criminal case under Section 395 IPC and session's trial with regard to the case was held and the petitioner was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. The petitioner aggrieved by the said judgment filed an appeal and the sentence imposed upon him was set aside in Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 1997 on 02.04.2002. It was, thereafter that the petitioner submitted a representation to the Director of School Education on 17.04.2004 stating that he could not attend the school and discharge his duties from the period from 21.01.1997 to 02.04.2002. Surprisingly, the Director, thereafter, treating the petitioner to be a temporary civil servant, passed the impugned notice terminating his services w.e.f. one month of 24th May, 2005.

(3.) HAVING held so, the question is whether we can direct that the petitioner should be reinstated in service or not. The petitioner has invoked extraordinary writ jurisdiction. Any litigant who invokes the extraordinary writ jurisdiction must also show that not only in law but also in equity he is entitled to the relief which he claims.