MD SHAFIQUE RAHMAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for quashing the office order as contained in Memo No. 1057 Godda dated 22.06.2009 (Annexure 1) wherein the respondent no. 2 terminated the petitioner from services of para teacher.

(2.) SANS details, facts in a nutshell is that the petitioner was appointed as para teacher in up -graded primary school in the year 2003. After his appointment, the petitioner continued to discharge his duties to the satisfaction of his superior authorities and after rendering services for about six years on the said post, the services of the petitioner, vide Annexure 1, has been terminated allegedly on the ground of unauthorized absence from duty causing serious dislocation of the functioning of the mid -day meal. The petitioner being aggrieved by the aforesaid termination order approached this Court invoking extra -ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 2 repelling the averments made in the writ application. In the counter affidavit, it has been contended inter alia that the services of the petitioner was terminated on the ground that the petitioner was absent from duty for the last six months causing total stoppage of mid -day meal and further allegation is that the petitioner threatened that he would draw salary sitting at his house and he will see what villages will do. It has further been stated that soon thereafter, another para teacher, namely, Bibi Anjum Aara was elected as Secretary of the said school on 11.05.2008, who wrote a letter to the Deputy Commissioner, Gooda narrating the act of the petitioner that although she was elected as para teacher, but the petitioner by dint of his muscular power and atrocious nature was causing difficulty to join her at the relevant post of para teacher. It has further been submitted in the counter affidavit that the petitioner remained absent from school and used to keep the attendance register under his custody, therefore, it was easy for him to put his signature in the attendance register. It has further been submitted that allegation against the petitioner was going on since long, therefore, the departmental proceeding led to termination of services of the petitioner. With the aforesaid contentions, the learned counsel for the respondents has justified the action impugned under Annexure 1 to the writ application.