Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6965 of 2021 Petitioner :- Bhagwan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Pandey,A.C.Tiwari(Ac) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Instruction filed today, is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 26.12.2020 passed by the respondent no. 3 whereby the services of the petitioner have been cancelled by means of an order which is prima facie stigmatic in nature.
The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Technical Assistant on contractual basis in pursuance of the Scheme as indicated in the Government Order dated 03.09.2007 and the petitioner continued to work. An order dated 26.12.2020 came to be passed dismissing the services of the petitioner on contractual basis mainly on the ground of an enquiry conducted wherein it was reported that the petitioner had misused his position.
The petitioner claims that the allegations contained in the order are prima facie wrong. He further claims that neither the petitioner was served with any enquiry report nor was given an opportunity of hearing prior to passing of the said order. He further argues that based upon the impugned order an FIR was also registered against the petitioner.
On perusal of the order dated 26.12.2020, it is clear that same is stigmatic in nature. It is well settled that an order which casts stigma should not be passed without observing the principles of natural justice.
The Standing Counsel, on the other hand, argues that in terms of the reports received, the action was taken against the petitioner. He further justifies the action in pursuance of the Government Order dated 03.09.2007. Without going into the merit of the contention, the order deserves to be set aside solely on the ground that the same casts stigma and no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner prior to passing of the said order.
Accordingly, the order dated 26.12.2020 passed by the Chief Development Officer, District Pilibhit (respondent no. 3) is set aside with liberty to the respondent to pass fresh order after furnishing copy of the report and affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands allowed in terms of the said order.
Copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court shall be treated as certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 28.7.2021 Puspendra