JAI NAND Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Services of the petitioner, a regular employee, were terminated by respondent No.2 vide order dtd. 17/11/2018. This order has been assailed in the instant petition.

(2.) Facts 2(i) The petitioner was appointed as a part time water carrier on 2/8/1997. He was made a whole time contingent employee on 11/3/2005. On 7/8/2008, petitioner was made a regular Class-IV employee and posted as such in Government Middle School Sangalwara, District Mandi.

(3.) Contentions Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Memorandum of charges dtd. 5/8/2015, produced by the respondents during hearing of the case was never served upon petitioner. The respondents never associated the petitioner with the disciplinary proceedings said to have been initiated against him under the charge sheet. The respondent-employer has not complied with the mandatory procedure laid down under the CCS (CCA) Rules for holding the disciplinary proceedings. Therefore, order dtd. 17/11/2018 is required to be quashed and set aside. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the petitioner was a habitual absentee. He never diligently attended to his duties. Ever since 2006, he continued to remain absent from school for no justifiable cause. The fact finding report was submitted and preliminary inquiry was also conducted by the respondents, which proved the charges leveled against the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order dtd. 17/11/2018, terminating the petitioner's services, does not suffer from any illegality.