BIJENDRA KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. The present writ application is being disposed of at the admission stage itself with the consent of the parties.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 1.8.2012 issued under the signature of Establishment Deputy Collector, Buxar, whereby contractual appointment of the petitioner on the post of I.T. Assistant has been terminated with immediate effect.

(3.) It has been pleaded in the writ application that pursuant to an advertisement for appointment of Block I.T. Assistant on contract basis, the petitioner had applied and after undergoing process of selection, he was finally selected and was appointed to the said post on contract basis vide letter dated 2.8.2011 issued by the District Magistrate Buxar. From the said letter it will appear that the petitioner was appointed on (sic--contract?) basis for a period of one year on consolidated salary of Rs. 8000/- per month. He had submitted his joining on 3.8.2011. It appears that in the meanwhile, an explanation was sought for, from him by the Office of the Collector, Buxar on being prima facie, satisfied about his poor performance. The petitioner is said to have submitted his explanation vide Annexure-8 dated 18.2.2013, and finally the impugned order dated 1.8.2012 came to be passed.