Gujarat High Court
Dharmendrakumar Virabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 6 February, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/779/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 779 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 21258 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
================================================================
DHARMENDRAKUMAR VIRABHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS NIRALI SARDA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 06/02/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. Pursuant to the order dated 10.12.2024, learned advocate Mr. H.S. Munshaw has filed an Affidavit of the Chief District Health Officer, Banaskantha District Panchayat, Palanpur dated 17.12.2024. The contents of the affidavit are as under :-
Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 01:12:31 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/779/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/02/2025 undefined "2] The Respondent No.3 submits that the appellant herein remained unauthorizedly absent w.e.f. 08.01.2020 as contractual Multi-purpose Health Worker (Male). The appellant was issued notice on 23.07.2020 by the Respondent No.3 herein through Taluka Health Officer, Kankrej and a copy of the Notice dated 23.07.2020 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-C. It is submitted that the said notice was to be sent to concerned Medical Officer by Taluka Health Offier and a photocopy of e-mail indicating that it was forwarded by Taluka Health Officer to Medical Officer on 28.07.2010 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-D. It is stated that the record relating to service or communication by Medical Officer to the appellant who was consistently absent from 08.01.2020 without any intimation is not available with the Primary Health Center. It is most respectfully stated that the appellant remained continuously absent and even Taluka Health Officer, Sihori informed about unauthorized absenteeism through letter dated 01.04.2021 and a copy thereof is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-E. It is submitted that ultimately a detailed order dated 03.05.2021 is passed by the then Chief District Health Officer, Banaskantha, District Panchayat and he is relieved from contractual employment and a copy of the order 03.05.2021 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-F. From a kind perusal thereof, it would be clear that there is a reference about unauthorized absenteeism w.e.f. 08.01.2020, non-response to notice, non-submission of leave report and disobedience in spite of telephonic instructions by Taluka Health Officer. It is submitted that the same was forwarded to Taluka Health Officer for service thereof to the appellant through Medical Officer. The Respondent No.3 submits that relevant record about service of the order dated 03.05.2021 is not available with Primary Health Centre as well as Taluka Health Officer.
At this stage, the Respondent No.3 submits that the appellant herein had addressed one leave report on 04.01.2020 and the same was not approved by Taluka Health Officer, Sihori, District Banaskantha and a copy thereof is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-G. It is submitted that even Taluka Health Officer, Sihor had also addressed a letter dated 31.01.2020 to the appellant calling upon him to offer explanation on why his contractual services should not be terminated on account of his absence and a copy thereof is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-H. It is submitted that the Taluka Health Officer, Sihor had also addressed a letter to the Respondent No.3 on Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 01:12:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/779/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/02/2025 undefined 14.02.2020 to take necessary steps to terminate contractual service on account of unauthorized absenteeism and a copy of letter dated 14.02.2020 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-I."
2. Thus, the deponent of the affidavit has accepted that record relating to the service in connection by the medical officer of the appellant about intimating or issuing notice to him before the termination is not available. However, he has referred to the inter-se communication between the parties.
3. Thus, the statement made by the present appellant in the present appeal that he was never issued notice, stands uncontroverted as there is no documentary evidence produced by the respondent showing that he was issued notice before termination. The appellant was terminated vide order dated 03.05.2021 on the alleged misconduct of remaining absent after he was reinstated.
4. Since the respondent has miserably failed in pointing out any communication in the form of any notice being issued before the termination of the appellant, we are inclined to set aside the termination order dated 03.05.2021. The learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate the aforesaid facts and has only rejected the Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 01:12:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/779/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/02/2025 undefined writ petition stating the same is filed after a delay of two years. It is noticed that the respondent was terminated on 03.05.2021 and the writ petition has been filed in the year 2023 and it cannot be said that there was some delay in assailing the order of termination more particularly, in the wake of the fact that the appellant was never issued any notice before his termination.
5. Thus, the present Appeal is allowed. The order dated 10.01.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge as also the termination order dated 03.05.2021 are quashed and set aside. The respondent/s shall re-instate the appellant on his original post within a period of three weeks. However, it will be open for the respondent/s incase if they so desire to follow the procedure as prescribed under the law before taking any action against the appellant.
Direct Service is permitted.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J) CAROLINE / DB # 90 Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 01:12:31 IST 2025