ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. ANJALI PHUKAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the CPC. The brief facts are that the respondent herein filed Title Suit No. 132/84, before the learned Sadar Munsiff, Guwahati. Her case in the plaint was that she was appointed under the Assam State Electricity Board (for short the ASEB) as L.D.A. cum Typist against a vacant post in the Central Store Division, by the Controller of Stores of the: ASEB by office order dated 31-10-83. But all of a sudden she was removed from service by order dated 28.3.84 without any reason and without following the procedure laid down in Article 311 of the Constitution of India and in a manner violative of principles of natural justice. In the said suit, the plaintiff prayed that the order dated 28.3.84 removing her from service should be sell aside and the Court should declare the plaintiff to be in service from 28-3-84.

(2.) The aforesaid suit was contested by the appellants who filed their written statement pleading that the suit was not maintainable and that the appointment of the plaintiff was fabricated and was a result of forgery perpetrated by the plaintiff on the defendants. It was stated in the said written statement that the plaintiff filed an application before the Controller of Stores, ASEB for appointment to the post of L.D.A cum Typist in the office of the S.D.O. Mechanical Division, Kahilipara, ASEB and the said application was forwarded to the Personnel Manager of the ASEB. Although the Personnel Manager did not direct the Controller of Stores, ASEB to appoint the plaintiff, on the basis of fabricated letter dated 24-9-83 containing a forged signature of the Personnel Manager, addressed to Controller of Stores, the plaintiff was appointed as L.D.A. Cum Typist in the Mechanical Stores Division, ASEB by the office order dated 31.10.83 of the Controller of Stores, ASEB. It was further stated in the written statement that normally appointment to the posts of cadre III and cadre IV under the ASEB including the post to which the plaintiff was appointed are made by holding proper test and interview by the ASEB, but in the instant case no such test or interview was held. As a consequence, the Grade-IV Union Employees raised the matter before the Chairman of the ASEB who directed a case to be lodged for forgery against the plaintiff before the police and pursuant to the said direction an ejahar was lodged before the Officer-in-charge, Paltan Bazar, Police Station and service of the plaintiff was terminated by order dated 28-3-84.

(3.) On the aforesaid pleadings of the parties, the learned Munsiff framed 5 issues, recorded the evidence led by the parties, and under issues No. 2 and 3 held by his judgment and decree dated 12-1-87 that, the plaintiff had not been able to establish that her appointment was duly made and that her removal from services was not just and proper and on the basis of the said findings dismissed the suit.