Sanjeev Pandey And Ors. vs State Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2102 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 22411 of 2020
 

 
Petitioner :- Sanjeev Pandey And Ors.
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Cooperative And Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Daya Shankar Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned State Counsel appearing for opposite parties.

Petition has been filed against order dated 12.2.2020 terminating services of petitioners as a Kurk Amin on the ground of low recovery of arrears of land revenue and treating petitioners to be a temporary employee.

Learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that the order impugned has been passed without any opportunity of hearing and without following the procedure required under the service regulations for holding an inquiry prior to termination of services. Learned counsel has drawn attention to the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. versus Chandra Prakash Pandey reported in (2001) 4 SCC page 78 whereunder persons such as petitioners employed as Kurk Amin on commission basis for recovery of outstanding dues were treated to be government servant holding civil post. As such it is submitted that the petitioners could not have been treated as temporary employee and is completely covered by the aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court due to which the opposite parties were bound to hold departmental proceedings and providing opportunity of hearing to petitioners prior to dispensing with result.

Learned counsel has also relied upon the judgment rendered by division bench of this court in the case of State of U.P. versus Sri Surendra Singh 2013 LCD 2367 in which the State has been restrained from terminating services of Kurk Amin employed for recovery on commission basis only on the ground of low recovery. He has also placed reliance upon the judgment in the case of Padam Singh Sharma vs. State of U.P., 2001 ALJ 2192.

The submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioners have considerable force.

In view thereof, the impugned order dated 12.2.2020 cannot stand and is set aside.

The writ petition stands allowed.

.

[Vivek Chaudhary,J.]

Order Date :- 19.1.2023

Sachin