Reserved on 22.9.2021
Delivered on 29.9.2021
Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3337 of 2020 Petitioner :- Ramdhar Shukla Respondent :- State Of U P And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Pratap Tiwari,Ashok Kumar Upadhyay,Shailesh Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Shivendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. The present petition has been filed alleging that the petitioner was enrolled as a Home Guard in the year 1990 and was called upon to perform his duties under Section 8 of the U.P. Home Guards Act, 1963 and since then the petitioner has continued to be in service.
3. The petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 31.8.2019, directing the petitioner to furnish his explanation in view of the lodging of the FIR against the petitioner as Case Crime No. 325 of 1997, under Sections 147, 148, 324, 336, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Walterganj, District Basti. The petitioner was served with second and third show cause notice also and the services of the petitioner were dispensed with by means of an order dated 9th January, 2020, holding that in view of the pendency of the criminal case against the petitioner, it was not desirable to continue the services of the petitioner with the Department and in exercise of powers under Section 12 (1) of the U.P. Home Guards Act, 1963, the services of the petitioner have been dispensed with.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner is holder of civil post as he had performed the duties in terms of the provisions of Section 8 of the Act and thus the manner in which the petitioners have been found ousted is bad in law.
5. This Court while deciding the case of Dheer Singh Vs. State of
U.P. and Others, Writ-A No. 8869 of 2021, decided on 9.9.2021, has elaborately considered and held that the persons who are performing duties under Section 8 of the Act are holders of civil post and are entitled to protection under Section 311 of the Constitution of India. The order impugned prima facie does not disclose that the procedure as prescribed under Article 311 of the Constitution of India was observed prior to passing of the dismissal order. As such, following the judgment in the case of Dheer Singh (Supra), the writ petition deserves to be allowed. The order dated 9.1.2020 is set aside with liberty to the respondent to pass fresh orders after complying with the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution of India in accordance with law.
6. In view of the fact that the dismissal order has been set aside, the petitioner shall be entitled to be assigned the work and shall be paid the wages, to which the petitioner is entitled.
7. The writ petition stands allowed in terms of the said order.
8. Copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court shall be treated as certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 29.9.2021 S. Rahman 2 of 2