SUDHANSU SHEKHAR Vs. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OFTECHNOLOGY, ADITYAPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in this writ application has challenged the order dated 17.2.2005 (Annexure -11) passed by the Director, National Institute of Technology, Jamshedpur whereby the services of the petitioner have been terminated from the date of issuance of the impugned order. While praying for quashing the impugned order, the petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a direction to reinstate him on the post of Clerk -cum -typist in the Department of Mathematics under the respondent National Institute of Technology.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent National Institute of Technology.

(3.) THE representation was forwarded by the concerned authorities to the Secretary, Science and Technology. Government of Bihar and awaiting appropriate instruction on the same, the respondents had engaged the petitioner on daily wage basis in September, 1990. However, in January, 1991, his services were discontinued. The petitioner Equivalent Citation:2009 -JX(Jhar) -0 -1154 submitted his representation praying for his absorption in service on compassionate grounds and in response, by a letter dated 12.12.1991 (Annexure -3), the petitioner was directed to appear before the Selection Committee for interview and test. The Committee, on finding him qualified, recommended his name for regular appointment, Pursuant to the recommendation of the Selection Committee, the concerned authorities of the respondents by letter dated 13.9.1993 (Annexure -4), addressed to the petitioner's mother, informed her that respondent Institute has decided to appoint the petitioner in the Institute on compassionate ground. However, such offer was made conditional and subject to vacating the quarter allotted to the deceased employee by the Institute. On such assurance being given, the petitioner's mother vacated the quarter and thereafter prayed for the grant of compassionate appointment. The respondents however refused to appoint the petitioner whereupon the petitioner's mother filed a writ application vide C.W.J.C. No. 3772 of 1998(R) before this Court. While disposing of the writ application, this Court had directed the respondent Institute to consider the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment within the time stipulated. When the order was not complied with, a contempt petition was filed and during the pendency of the contempt petition the respondents had granted appointment on compassionate ground to the petitioner by appointment letter dated 9.7.2001 (Annexure -6/A). Almost two years later, the respondent No. 3 by letter issued, directed the petitioner to produce documents/informations relating to the petitioner's appointment on compassionate grounds, within one month from the date of receipt of the aforesaid letter (Annexure -6/A). The petitioner submitted his replies through proper channel to the respondent No. 3. Almost two years later, by notice dated 7.1.2005 (Annexure -5), the respondent No. 3 directed the petitioner to show cause as to why his services should not be terminated. The petitioner submitted his show cause replies within one week from the date of receipt of the show cause notice. Despite the show cause replies submitted by the petitioner, the respondent No. 3, by the impugned letter dated 17.2.2005 (Annexure -11), informed the petitioner that his replies being found not satisfactory, his services were terminated.