NARINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order (Annexure P-ll) passed by the Director of Secondary Education, Haryana terminating the services of the petitioner has been made subject-matter of challenge in this writ petition. Prayer of the petitioner is to quash the impugned order and to direct the respondents to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits. Brief facts:-

(2.) The respondents have filed a joint reply. In Para 3 of the reply, it has been stated that the service of the petitioner has been terminated as a measure of disciplinary action on account of gross misbehaviour due to wilful absence w.e.f. 16.12.1993 to 15.3.1994 and 31.10.1994 to 31.3.1995. The respondents have pleaded that the petitioner has shown deliberate disregard for the Government service and has absented from duty without sanction of leave.

(3.) After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Advocate General, we are satisfied that the impugned order (Annexure P-11) is liable to be quashed on the short ground that though inocuously warded, it is an order of termination of service as a measure of punishment. We are not required to make a detailed examination of the circumstances attending the order (AnnexureP-ll) because in the reply filed by them, the respondents have come out with a specific plea that service of the petitioner has been terminated as a measure of disciplinary action in regard to the allegation of wilful absence from duty. Thus, the real basis of order (Annexure P-ll) is the allegation of misconduct levelled against the petitioner, namely, wilful absence from duty. In respect of this allegation, no inquiry has been made by the respondents and no action-oriented notice was given to the petitioner. It is, therefore, evident that the petitioner had been condemned unheard.