LAWS(RAJ)-2015-1-368

PRAKASH KACHHAWA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

Decided On January 29, 2015
Prakash Kachhawa Appellant
V/S
State of Rajasthan And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri Rishipal Agarwal, learned counsel appearing in Special Appeal No.496/2012, representing the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer (for short, "Judge, MACT"), and Shri Suresh Kashyap & Shri Tanveer Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for Shri Prakash Kachhawa, the employee, in Special Appeal No.1308/2012.

(2.) These two Special Appeals, filed by the Judge, MACT and the employee namely, Shri Prakash Kachhawa, arise out of the judgment and order of learned single Judge dated 05.01.2012, by which he had allowed the writ petition filed by Shri Prakash Kachhawa serving as a Peon on temporary basis in the office of Judge, MACT, Ajmer against verbal termination of his services on 31.03.2001. Learned single Judge held that the Judge, MACT did not follow the procedure prescribed under Rule 86(2) (a) and Rule 86(3) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal Rules, 1958 (for short, "Rules of 1958"), in terminating the services of the petitioner. The verbal termination order/communication dated 31.03.2001 was quashed and set aside with directions that the petitioner shall be reinstated in service forthwith with all consequential benefits. Learned single Judge, however, confined the back wages to 25% along with all other service benefits.

(3.) The facts, admitted to both the parties, are that Shri Prakash Kachhawa was selected by direct recruitment and appointed as Class-IV in the Judge, MACT, Ajmer in pursuance to the selections vide advertisement dated 15.03.2000, in which he was found suitable. He was given appointment after his selection, following the procedure laid down in the Rajasthan Class-IV Service (Recruitment & Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963. The appointment was made along with one another candidate Shri Narsingh Ram in the pay scale Rs.2550-55-2660-60-3200. The appointment order provided that the appointment is purely on temporary basis for a period of three months, and that his tenure can be extended from time to time.