GH. HAIDER Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the medium of this petition, the petitioner is challenging the action of respondents, whereby he has been terminated/discharged from service. The facts as emerge from the pleadings of the parties are that 120 persons including the petitioner were engaged as SPOs on contractual basis vide Order No. SPO/01/3381-88/C dated 26.02.2001 issued by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Doda. It is averred that the petitioner was performing his duties to the entire satisfaction of his higher authorities. He claimed to have participated in various anti-militancy operations, and in one of such operations in Khithar Bonjwah area he got injured and remained admitted in the hospital, for which he was also rewarded by the respondents. It is contended that despite rendering best services and actively participating in anti-militancy operations, the respondents without any reason or providing him an opportunity of hearing or serving any notice terminated his services.

(2.) Objections have been filed on behalf of respondents. They have also produced copy of Order No. SPO/627-41/C dated 21.01.2003, whereby services of 24 SPOs came to be terminated. The stand taken by the respondents is that the petitioner along with some more SPOs had misused their official position and harassed one Din Mohd. son of Khaliq Pathan resident of Bonjwah. It is contended that the matter was properly enquired at departmental level and only thereafter the services of petitioner were terminated vide order dated 21.01.2003. The next stand of respondents is that the services of petitioner were totally temporary and need based, therefore, he has no right to seek his re-engagement nor is entitled to protection under Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India because the petitioner was not borne on the cadre of service nor was holding a post on substantive basis.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.