MONIKA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed to quash the orders Annexure P/6 to P/10 passed by the Director. Industrial Training and Vocational Education, Haryana and the Principals/Headmistresses of the Industrial Training Institute, Women Wing, Rohtak, Ambala City, find and Gurgaon. The petitioners have also questioned the legality of the order passed by this Court on March 2, 1995, in C.W.P. 6319 of 1994 (Smt. Santosh and three others vs. State of Haryana and another). However, during the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that he does not want to press the prayer of the petitioners to recall the order dated 2.3.1995 passed by this Court in the above mentioned writ petition. Even otherwise, we are of the opinion that an order passed by the High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction cannot be set aside or nullified directly or indirectly by issue of writ under Article 226 of the Constitution. Every High Court is a court of record under Article 215 and, therefore, order passed by it under Article 226 of the Constitution can be set aside only in L.P.A. in case it is an order passed by a Single Bench or by the Supreme Court in a petition for Special Leave to Appeal and not otherwise. Therefore, we do not find any justification to entertain the prayer made by the petitioners to recall/set aside the order dated 2.3.1995.

(2.) For deciding other issues involving challenge to the termination of the services of the petitioners brought about by Annexures P-6 to P-10, we may make brief reference to the acts. The Subordinate Services Selection Board, Haryana (for short the Board), advertised 8 posts of Hair and Skin Care Instructors for the Industrial Training Department. Two posts were reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates and two were reserved for Exservieemen. The petitioners, who fulfilled the conditions of eligibility, applied for recruitment to the posts advertised by the Board, petitioners Nos. 3 and 4 applied against the posts reserved for ex-servicemen category. After interviews the petitioners were found suitable and were appointed as Hair and Skin Care Instructors vide orders Annexures P/2 to P/5 issued by the Director, Industrial Training and Vocational Education. Haryana, on 13.2.1995. Pursuant to the orders of appointment, the petitioners .submitted their joining reports at the respective places of posting and started working on the post of Instructors. However, just after 7 days of their appointment, the Director, Industrial Training and Vocational Education, Haryana, Issued an order Annexure P/6 directing the termination of the services of the petitioners and in compliance of the order issued by the Director, the Principals/Headmistresses of the various Industrial Training Institutes ordered for the relieving of the petitioners.

(3.) The petitioners have challenged the termination of their services on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice and arbitrariness. They have pleaded that termination of their services has been brought about without any reason or rhyme and that for accommodating adhoc Instructors who have been ordered to be regularised by the High Court vide order dated 23.1995, the services of the petitioners could not have been terminated.