ANIL SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks issuance of writ of Certiorari seeking to quash order No.331 of 1998 dated 15.12.1998 whereby the petitioner has been discharge from service. He further seeks writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner as being inservice candidate and grant all consequential benefits including the salary.

(2.) THE petitioner has averred in the petition that the petitioner was appointed as Warder vide order -dated 05.06.1996. The petitioner absented himself from duty w.e.f. 23.03.1998 on account of illness of his wife. Subsequently, he also fell ill and could not report for duty. He, reported to resume duty but has not been permitted to resume his duty by the respondents. Under such circumstances, the petitioner filed SWP No.1244/2000, which came to be disposed of on 29.09.2000 directing the respondents to hold inquiry as services of the petitioner have not come to end by any specific order. The petitioner, thereafter, was served with the impugned Order No.331 of 1998 dated 15.12.1998, whereby respondent No.2 has discharged the petitioner from service w.e.f. 25.04.1998.

(3.) THE impugned order has been challenged by the petitioner on the ground that it has been passed by the respondents to defeat the judgment of the Court delivered in SWP No.1244/2000. As per direction of the Court dated 29.09.2000, the respondents could not have prevented the petitioner from discharging duty. The impugned order has been passed without affording an opportunity of being heard, holding an inquiry or observing the principle of natural justice. The respondents have not appreciated the medical evidence produced by the petitioner and have arbitrarily termed it as fraudulent evidence.