LAXMI SINGH Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, HRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. As short question is involved, the appeal is taken up for final disposal forthwith, by consent.

(2.) THIS appeal takes exception to the decision, dated 25th July, 2012, in CWP No.8859 of 2011 -F, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant, seeking direction against the respondents to reinstate him in service and to give all consequential benefits, has been dismissed. The appellant approached this Court by way of writ petition on the assertion that his services were terminated on the basis of FIR registered against him in connection with offence punishable under Sections 307, 342, 380 and 451 of IPC. That FIR appears to have been registered on 29th February, 1992. From the office order, which was impugned in the writ petition, Annexure P - 2, it appears that the services of the appellant were terminated on 6th March, 1992. No doubt, the office order is in subsequent point of time after the registration of the FIR, dated 29th February, 1992, however, the ground urged by the appellant could be taken forward only if it were to be held that the services of the appellant were terminated only because of registration of FIR against the appellant on 29th February, 1992 and for no other reason.

(3.) IN other words, whether the services of the appellant were terminated purely on the basis of FIR, dated 29th February, 1992, is an issue which needs to be addressed in the first place. If the respondents' contention is to be accepted, the ground, on which the appellant had approached this Court by way of writ petition for reinstatement in service, would not be available to the appellant and for which reason the writ petition would fail unless the appellant is in a position to assail the order of termination on other available and permissible grounds.