Sunil Mahawar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4466 MP

                                  1                                WA-733-2021
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                    WA-733-2021
           (SUNIL MAHAWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


Jabalpur, Dated : 18-08-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.
      Shri A. A. Bernard, learned Deputy Advocate General for the
respondents/ State.

This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge

dated 4.8.2021 by which writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed. He was working as Gram Rojgar Sahayat on contract basis in Gram Panchayat Khandera, Janpad Panchayat Sanchi, District Raisen. His services were terminated by order of Chief Executive Officer cum Additional District Program Coordinator, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, District Raisen, by order dated 20.7.2021.

The learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition in view of alternative remedy available to the appellant by way of filing an appeal to the Appellate Authority with a direction to decide the same within a period of

three months from the date of filing.

Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge relied on the guide-lines issued by Madhya Pradesh Rajya Rojgar Guarantee Parishad on 2.6.2021 in which the authority had been given to the Chief Executive Officer of the Janpad Panchayat to terminate the contractual appointment but subsequently, the aforesaid guidelines have been amended by order dated 21.1.2021 of the Government in the terms that contractual services of Gram Rojgar Sahayak can be terminated only by the Collector-cum-District Programme Coordinator after due adherence to the principle of natural justice and giving due opportunity of hearing to the affected employee. It is submitted that neither the impugned order has been passed by the Collector nor the principles of natural justice has been followed.

2 WA-733-2021 Shri A. A. Bernard, the learned Deputy Advocate General has invited attention of this Court towards the order of termination dated 20.7.2021 which at the bottom states that the order has been approved by the Collector- cum- District Programme Coordinator and, therefore, this order actually has been passed by the Collector but the consequential order has been passed by

the Chief Executive Officer and therefore, there is no illegality in the order. According to the learned Deputy Advocate General appeal would lie to the Divisional Commissioner.

Having regard to the rival submissions, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. However, considering the nature of the case, we direct that appeal filed by the appellant shall be decided by the Appellate Authority i.e. Divisional Commissioner, within a period of 45 days from the date of the filing of appeal, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

                                             (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)                             (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
                                              CHIEF JUSTICE                                          JUDGE


                                       mrs. mishra




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by MRS DEEPA MISHRA
Date: 2021.08.23 14:38:48 IST