Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kewal Singh Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 January, 2022
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1 WP-20560-2020
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP No. 20560 of 2020
(KEWAL SINGH YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Jabalpur, Dated : 04-01-2022
Shri Siddhanth Kochar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Anand Nayak, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State.
Heard finally with the consent of both the parties.
In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the
petitioner has assailed the legality, validity and proprietary of the order dated
14.02.2020 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat,
Khalwa, District Panchayat Khandwa/respondent No.3, whereby services of
the petitioner, who was working on the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak have
been terminated on account of financial irregularities, not fulfilling the
responsibilities of maintaining a muster roll from the past three years and also
negligence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order impugned is
stigmatic and the same cannot be passed without giving any opportunity of
hearing or conducting the inquiry. Though a preliminary inquiry was
conducted but the same was conducted behind the back of the petitioner
prior to issuance of the show cause notice.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the
Division Bench of Gwalior High Court passed in W.A. No.1166/2017
(Malkhan Singh Malviya Vs. State of M.P.) in which it has been held that
if the order is stigmatic even though the employee is not a member of regular
establishment but he is entitled to get proper opportunity of hearing and
should also be supplied sufficient material on the basis of which charges
levelled against him found proved holding him guilty. In the present case as
well the petitioner is not a member of the regular establishment.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the
petitioner has committed financial irregularities. A complaint was received at
Signature Not Verified
SAN
the C.M. Helpline. Thereafter, a Committee, consisting of two members, was
Digitally signed by VARSHA
CHOURASIYA
Date: 2022.01.05 16:47:47 IST
2 WP-20560-2020
constituted to enquire into the matter. The Committee had conducted a
detailed inquiry after examining the witnesses, whereby it has been revealed
that the petitioner has committed guilt and did not disburse the salary to as
many as 34 labourers of MANREGA. Accordingly, the petitioner was served
with a notice dated 16.01.2020, however, the reply of the petitioner was not
found to be satisfactory. On the basis of the aforesaid, his services have
been terminated. Thus, The respondents had not committed any irregularity
while passing the impugned order and the petition deserves to be dismissed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
On perusal of the pleadings and record of the case, it is seen that the
inquiry was conducted prior to issuance of the show cause notice dated
16.01.2020. The inquiry report was submitted on 02.01.2020, Annexure R/1.
It is also an admitted fact that the inquiry was got conducted behind the back
of the petitioner without affording any opportunity of hearing.
In such circumstances, the impugned order cannot be allowed to
stand. Accordingly, the order dated 14.02.2020 is hereby set aside, however,
the respondent/authority concerned is at liberty to consider the case of the
petitioner afresh after affording him opportunity of hearing and after
supplying the relevant material on the basis of which charges levelled against
him have been proved and his services have been terminated. The concerning
authority should consider the procedure required to be followed as held by
the Division Bench in the case of Malkhan Singh (supra). If the concerning
authority decides to proceed in accordance with law, the fresh inquiry, if
conducted, shall be concluded within six months from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this order.
Since the order impugned is set aside, the petitioner shall be allowed to
continue in service but no back wages can be claimed for the period for
which he remained out of service.
Petitions stands allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by VARSHA
CHOURASIYA
Date: 2022.01.05 16:47:47 IST
3 WP-20560-2020
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)
JUDGE
vc
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by VARSHA
CHOURASIYA
Date: 2022.01.05 16:47:47 IST
