Gujarat High Court
Pankajkumar Ramabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 2 August, 2021
Bench: A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/10592/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10592 of 2021
================================================================
PANKAJKUMAR RAMABHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. JIT P PATEL(6994) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR DM DEVNANI, AGP for the Respondent No.1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 02/08/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for the
respondent-State.
2. It is the case of the present petitioner that the service of the
petitioner is illegally terminated by the impugned order dated 23.06.2021
passed by the respondent no.2 without giving any notice or hearing.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Jit Patel appearing for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner was selected on the post of Social Welfare
Inspector, Class-III after undergoing selection procedure initiated by
Gujarat Subordinate Service Selection Board. He has submitted that the
petitioner was appointed on 05.12.2014 and he presented himself on duty
on 11.12.2014. It is submitted that thereafter the petitioner was embroiled
in ACB case and an FIR came to be registered at the ACB Police Station,
Palanpur on 20.04.2021, after a trap was organized by the ACB. It is
submitted that the petitioner came to be arrested on 20.04.2021 and in
view of the said incident, the petitioner was straightway terminated from
service by placing reliance on the service condition.
C/SCA/10592/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2021
3.1. Learned advocate Mr.Jit Patel has further submitted that the
petitioner could not have been terminated without holding proper
departmental proceedings. In support of his submission, he has placed
reliance on the judgment dated 24.07.2020 passed in Letters Patent
Appeal No.1596 of 2019. He has further referred to the terms and
conditions of the petitioner's appointment order and has submitted that
the condition No.14 though refers to non-issuance of notice, the
respondent authorities are required to give an opportunity of hearing, as
per the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court.
4. Per contra, learned AGP Mr.D.M.Devnani has submitted that
though the impugned order dated 23.06.2021 is passed without issuance
of notice, the same may not be set aside as the petitioner was embroiled
in a corruption case.
5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties.
6. The impugned order dated 23.06.2021 terminating the present
petitioner from service is premised on the FIR, which was registered
against the present petitioner for the offence under the Prevention of
Corruption Act. It is not in dispute that no notice has been issued before
terminating the service of the petitioner. The Division Bench, while
examining the provisions of the relevant resolution as well as service
condition of such employees, who are appointed on contractual basis, has
held that if the termination of service is stigmatic then such termination
cannot be effected without holding a departmental inquiry or giving
reasonable opportunity of hearing to such employee.
7. In light of the aforesaid facts, the present petition is allowed. The
impugned order 23.06.2021 is hereby quashed and set aside. The
C/SCA/10592/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2021
petitioner shall be reinstated in service within a period of one month from
the date of receipt of this order. However, it would be open for the
respondents to pass appropriate order, after holding appropriate
proceedings in accordance with law and after giving a reasonable
opportunity to the petitioner.
8. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
ABHISHEK
