DIKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned Senior counsel, assisted by Mr. Piyush Chitresh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P. (S) No. 3976 of 2016, W.P. (S) No. 3974 of 2016 and W.P. (S) No. 3975 of 2016 and Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, learned S.C.-IV, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State of Jharkhand in all the matters and Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 5638 of 2017. Rest of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in other writ petitions has adopted the arguments advanced by Mr. Rajiv Ranjan. Learned counsel, Mr. Amit Kumar Das has argued in W.P.(S) No. 5638 of 2017, wherein, the prayer is for setting aside the decision of termination of services of the petitioners contained in memo no. 573/Ra. Ka. Dated 08.04.2017.

(2.) In these cases, common question of fact and law is involved and that is why they have been heard together. All the writ petitions are common. W.P. (S) No. 3976 of 2016 has been taken as lead case and the facts of this case is narrated herein below.

(3.) These writ petitions have been preferred for quashing the notification no. 3646 dated 23.06.2016, whereby, the services/appointments of the petitioners have been terminated on the ground of irregularities in the appointment procedure by some other persons, without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and in complete violation of the principles of natural justice and doctrine of segregation which professes that such candidates, who have successfully qualified and secured places in the final merit/select list without indulging in any misconduct or being beneficiary of any manipulation, cannot and should not be made to suffer. The petitioners have also prayed to hold and declare that the actions of the respondent authorities in terminating the petitioners, after appointment being made with due process of law, is wholly illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable and the same is unsustainable in the eyes of law. It is also prayed to direct the respondent authorities to forthwith reinstate the services of the petitioners as the petitioners have been terminated illegally.