AJAY KUMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for:

(2.) The factual exposition, as delineated in the writ application, in brief is that petitioner initially joined the services of Coal India Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'CIL' for the sake of brevity) as Junior Executive (Trainee) on 11.08.1983. By passage of time, his services was transferred to Eastern Coalfields Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'ECL for the sake of brevity) where he was promoted to the post of General Manager and accordingly he gave his joining on the said post on 01.03.2009. The petitioner while posted as General Manager, Salenpur Area, ECL an advertisement was published inviting applications for appointment on the post of Director (Technical) in ECL and the petitioner being eligible applied and after due selection process, appointment letter was issued to him on 15.09.2016. While continuing as such, an advertisement was published by the Public Enterprises Selection Board (hereinafter referred to as 'PSEB' for the sake of brevity) on 03.03.2017 inviting applications from eligible executives for appointment on the post of Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Bharat Coking Coal Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'BCCL' for the sake of brevity). The petitioner after going through the selection process was declared successful and was appointed on the said post vide order dated 25.09.2017 and the detailed terms and conditions of the appointment of the petitioner was communicated vide letter dated 08.02.2018. It has been averred that in the appointment letter it has specifically been mentioned that his tenure of appointment would be from the date of assumption of charge of post till the date of his superannuation i.e. 31.03.2020, or until further order, whichever is earlier. The appointment letter further stipulates that the appointment is of contract basis and the Government will have an option to terminate his services with three months' notice or with three months' pay in lieu thereof. In the writ application, it has further been averred that in Clause 1.2 of the detailed terms and conditions, as conveyed vide letter dated 08.02.2018, it has been mentioned that after expiry of first year the performance of the petitioner shall be reviewed to enable the Government of India to take a view regarding continuance of his rest period. But, without fulfilling any of the guidelines as enumerated in appointment letter or detailed terms and conditions, as conveyed vide letter dated 08.02.2018 impugned order dated 16.10.2018 has been passed whereby petitioner has been relieved from the post of CMD, BCCL and is repatriated to his lien post of General Manager, ECL.

(3.) Heard Mr. P.S. Patwalia, learned senior counsel being assisted by Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Rajiv Sinha, learned A.S.G.I for the respondents-Union of India and Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, learned counsel for respondent no. 7.