SAHIBUR RAHMAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S K Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P&RD Department appearing for all the respondents. This writ petition is directed against the Office Order dtd. 1/10/2021 (Annexure-4), terminating the contract engagement of the petitioner with immediate effect.

(2.) Be it stated herein that the petitioner was engaged as Gram Rojgar Shahyak (GRS) on contract basis vide engagement Order dtd. 1/7/2009 up to 22/2/2010 (Annexure-1). The engagement of the petitioner continued from time to time until he was terminated by the aforesaid impugned Office Order dtd. 1/10/2021.

(3.) The case projected by the petitioner is that the impugned order is punitive in nature and that adequate opportunity was not afforded to him prior to passing the same since the very basis of the issuing show-cause notice is the enquiry report submitted by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Hojai which had not been served to him. Therefore, he was not in a position to make an effective reply to the show-cause notice. According to the petitioner, he was not the sole authority responsible for the preparation of the Muster Roll and in fact, as per the guidelines in this regard, the Panchayat representatives played a vital role in execution of the MGNREGA schemes and that the village Monitoring Committee constituted by the local people are responsible to monitor the entire schemes and therefore, the allegation made against the petitioner and his termination on the basis of enquiry report submitted by the CEO is bad in law and should be set aside.