RAJENDRA KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Manish Bhandari for the appellant and Mr. R.N. Mathur, Additional Advocate General on behalf of the State of Rajasthan.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated February 26, 1996 in SB. Civil Writ Petition No. 3712/1995 passed by a learned Judge of this Court. The appellant filed a writ petition against the order of termination passed by the respondents. According to the appellant, the principles of natural justice as well as the procedures prescribed under the CCA Rules have not been followed. The appellant's father Gopal Chand Sharma was a Government employee who died on July 29, 1983 while in service. It is stated that at the time of death of the appellant's father, the appellant was an infant. The appellant's mother also died on May 6, 1979. The appellant's father married a second wife. When the appellant attained the age of 16 years, he moved an application for compassionate appointment and the appellant was given appointment by the respondent in the year 1984. It is further stated that the appellant's services were found to be satisfactory and he was also given selection grade on the completion of 9 years service. While so, a notice dated February 27, 1988 was issued to him stating that he had misrepresented to the respondents while obtaining the compassionate appointment. The appellant filed a reply to the show cause notice. However an order of termination was passed on December 31, 1988. The appellant thereafter filed a Writ Petition (135/1989) to quash and set aside the order dated December 31, 1988. In the said writ petition the grievance of the present appellant was that the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have not been complied with before terminating his services. The said contention was accepted by this Court and the order of termination was quashed and set aside, on the limited aspect for compliance with the provisions of Section 25-F of the 1.D. Act, as the same had not been done earlier. Thereafter the appellant was reinstated- This being the only limited question, the intimation was given to the appellant (petitioner in the aforesaid writ petition) that immediately on the expiry of notice period, his services shall stand automatically terminated and after his termination he will be entitled to the benefits as per the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act treating his earlier services of 11 years, an average salary at the rate of 15 days per year shall be paid to him on each completed year of service.

(3.) Thereafter the Government referred the matter to the Lokayukta as referred to in para 10 of the writ petition. A complaint was made against one Mr. Babulal Jain the then District Education Officer, Mr. K.D. Pandey, Office Superintendent and Mr. Sita Ram Verma, UDC to the Lokayukta of the State of Rajasthan. It was found that since appointment of the appellant was made by one Mr. Ganpat Lal Vyas and therefore, the Lokayukta directed the State Government in its Department of Personnel on December 30, 1994 to remove the appellant from service after complying with the provisions of Section 25-F of the l.D. Act.