DEVESH KUMAR GUPTA Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.C. to A.A.G.-5 on behalf of the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 5.9.2013 passed by the District Magistrate, Madhepura, whereby, petitioner's plea against an earlier order of termination of his contractual appointment as Programme Officer has been rejected. The Court takes notice of the fact that the District Magistrate, Madhepura, while passing the impugned order, was in fact not considering the petitioner's appeal rather he passed the said order after the matter was remanded by the Appellate Authority i.e. the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar to him, though at the bottom of order it has been mentioned that petitioner's appeal was being dismissed.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Programme Officer on contractual basis under District Rural Development Agency, Madhepura by Rural Development Department. By an order dated 28.9.2011, on the allegation of certain irregularities, the District Magistrate, Madhepura, terminated the contract of the petitioner. It appears from a communication dated 22.9.2009 issued by the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department that aggrieved by termination of contract, the person appointed on contract basis could file an appeal before the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, if such order of termination was passed by the District Magistrate-cum-Project Co-ordinator. The Appellate Authority i.e. Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department thereafter, vide an order dated 27.6.2013 noticed that order of termination of petitioner's contractual appointment was passed by the District Magistrate, Madhepura, without following the principle of natural justice as no opportunity of hearing was given to him. Accordingly, matter was remanded back to the District Magistrate, and it is on such remand that the impugned order dated 5.9.2013 has been passed by the District Magistrate, Madhepura. It appears that against the said order dated 5.9.2013 issued by memo No. 1676 dated 20.9.2013, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar on 22.10.2013.

(3.) Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner's contract has been terminated on non-est grounds. He further submits that though the appeal was preferred on 22.10.2013, till the date it has not even been heard. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I consider it appropriate to direct the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, to dispose of the petitioner's appeal within two months from the production/receipt of a copy of the order.