GOPAL BHARALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE writ petitions are directed against individual orders dated 16. 10. 2000 terminating the services of the petitioners as Extension Officer under the Directorate of Industries and Commerce. The petitioners were appointed as Extension Officer under the then Director of Industries by individual appointment orders dated 03. 05. 95, 25. 07. 95 and 30. 12. 94. Various writ petitions were filed challenging the legality and validity of the selection process in which the petitioners along with others numbering about 150 were purportedly selected. By a common judgment and order dated 01. 09. 97 passed in those writ petitions, the selection and appointments were held to be illegal. However, it was provided that before cancelling the order of appointments, the appointees should be given an opportunity of being heard. The said judgment was carried on appeal by way of filing Writ Appeals No. 544/1997 and 549/1997 which were disposed of by judgment and order dated 18. 11. 99. The Division Bench while upholding the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge made a modification of the same providing that in case the appointees submit their reply to the show cause notices, the concerned authority shall consider the same without being prejudiced by the observations made by the learned Single Judge affecting their cases.

(2.) PURSUANT to the said judgment and order of the Division Bench, individual and identically worded show cause notices all dated 03. 01. 2000 were issued to the petitioners. No specific ground was indicated in the show cause notice except making a vague statement that the petitioners were appointed through some irregular procedure, without specifying anything as to what were those irregular procedure and also as to how the petitioners were involved in such irregularities. The show cause notices were identically worded by which the petitioners were directed to submit their reply. They were also directed to submit their testimonials such as academic certificates, call letters for interview and appointment orders.

(3.) THE petitioners responded to the said show cause notices by filing their individual reply and submitted their documents as was directed to be produced by the aforesaid show cause notices. This was followed by the impugned orders all dated 16. 10. 2000 terminating the services of the petitioners. In respect of the petitioner in W. P. (C) No. 3996/2001, the ground of termination of service was stated to be his failure to qualify in the written test. In case of the seven writ petitioners involved in W. P. (C) No. 2465/2001, ground of termination of the services of the 1st three petitioners and the 7th petitioner was stated to be their failure to qualify in the written test, while the ground of termination of services of the remaining three petitioners was stated to be non-inclusion of their name in the select list. Such orders of termination, terminating the services of the petitioners was followed by a communication dated 21. 10. 2000 issued by the Government of Assam, in the Department of Industries and Commerce addressed to the Director, requesting not to take any action in respect of the services of the petitioners which was further followed by the order of the Director dated 23. 10. 2000 keeping in abeyance the termination of services of the petitioners. As per the averments made in the writ petitions the respondents were trying to accommodate 11 other persons in place of the petitioners illegally. It was under these circumstances, the writ petitions were filed and this Court was inclined to pass interim orders protecting the services of the petitioners.