HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
Writ Petition No.30778 of 2016
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:-
"to issue writ, order or directions more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings dated P2/1(49)/2009-MSRD, dt 17.11.2009 passed by 3rd respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner without following the principles of natural justice as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and Judgments of this Honble Court and set aside the same with all consequential benefits including reinstatement with continuity of service with all consequential benefits including back wages."
2. Heard Sri P.Govinda Rajulu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Thoom Srinivas, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Corporation.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as contract driver in the respondent Corporation on 21.07.2008 and his services were terminated through the impugned proceedings dated 17.11.2009. Respondent No.3 initiated the proceedings, issued charge memo on 25.07.2009 on the alleged ground of unauthorised absence from 06.05.2009 to 20.07.2009, 2 though the petitioner submitted leave application requesting the respondent Corporation to sanction the leave on the ground that his wife admitted in the hospital due to her ill-health. Not granting the leave, the respondent Corporation conducted ex-parte enquiry and basing on the said enquiry report, terminated the service of the petitioner without giving reasonable opportunity and also without furnishing enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer. Questioning the said termination order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority on 19.08.2010. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted another representation to the appellate authority on 28.07.2015. When the appellate authority failed to consider the appeal, the petitioner filed this Writ Petition.
4. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel submits that the respondent Corporation after following due procedure as contemplated under the regulation, issued charge memo and also appointed Enquiry Officer to conduct the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer after conducting detailed enquiry, submitted enquiry report on 23.09.2009. The respondent Corporation issued show cause notice on 3 20.10.2009 by enclosing a copy of the Enquiry report directing the petitioner to submit his explanation as to why his services should not be terminated. The said notice was returned unserved. He further submits that the said information was also affixed on the notice board. Inspite of the same, the petitioner has not submitted any explanation nor participated in the enquiry. The respondent Corporation has not received alleged appeal filed by the petitioner dated 19.08.2010 and after lapse of a long period, the petitioner filed appeal on 28.07.2015 questioning the termination order dated 17.11.2009 and the same is not maintainable under law.
5. By way of reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to the ill-health of the petitioner's wife, he could not attend the duty and his wife died and the petitioner rendered two years of service as a contract driver in the respondent Corporation and except this employment, there is no other livelihood to maintain himself and his children and requested this Court on humanitative grounds to direct the respondent Corporation 4 to appoint the petitioner as contract driver afresh without any other benefits.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and to meet the ends of justice, the petitioner is directed to submit a representation to the respondent Corporation for seeking appointment to the post of contract driver without any service benefits including backwages within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such representation, the respondent Corporation is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service as contract driver afresh within a period of two(02) months thereafter subject to medical examination and also further the petitioner shall be placed under observation for a period of one year from the date of appointment and during the said period, if the petitioner committed very same mistake the respondents are entitled to remove the petitioner from service without issuing any notice. It is made clear that this order shall not be a precedent to any other case. 5
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO 11-09-2023 SA 6 175 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO Writ Petition No.30778 of 2016 Dated: 11.09.2023 Sa