Poonam Chand Suthar vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:39801)
2024 Latest Caselaw 8483 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Poonam Chand Suthar vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:39801) on 24 September, 2024

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:39801]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6964/2022

Poonam Chand Suthar S/o Prabhu Ram Suthar, Aged About 39
Years, Village Hadda, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner (Raj.)
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
         Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Govt. Of
         Rajasthan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2.       District Co-Ordinator (Mnrega) And District Collector,
         Nagaur (Raj.)
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :    Mr. J.S. Bhaleria
For Respondent(s)              :    Mrs. Neelam Sharma, AGC



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

24/09/2024

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely

covered by a judgment rendered by a coordinate bench of this

Court in the case of Vinod Kumar Lalwani vs. The State of

Rajasthan & Ors, decided on 03.05.2023, wherein, it has been

held as under :-

17. A bare look at the condition No.6(i) of the agreement shows that the contract of an employee can be terminated after conducting an inquiry and the misconduct having been proved against him.

Clause 7(ii) of the agreement specifies the authority competent to pass order of termination of contract.

18. It is not is dispute that neither any notice was served on the petitioner prior to issuance of the impugned order nor any inquiry was conducted. The impugned order, on the face of it, is contrary to the conditions of the contract which governs the parties.

19. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present petition is allowed. The impugned order 02.02.2018

[2024:RJ-JD:39801] (2 of 2) [CW-6964/2022]

being contrary to the terms of the agreement as well as the principles of natural justice, is hereby quashed and set aside.

20. The respondents would nevertheless be at liberty to proceed afresh against the petitioner in accordance with law.

21. The present writ petition is allowed.

22. Stay application also stands disposed of.

Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to

controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the

petitioner.

In view of the submissions made before this Court, the

present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed by

this Court in Vinod Kumar Lalwani (supra).

However, it is made clear that the petitioner will be subjected

to the proper enquiry which shall be instituted by the respondents

within a period of ten days and shall be completed within a period

of one month from the date of inception.

It is made clear that if the charges against the petitioner are

not found proved then the benefits of the judgment rendered in

case of Vinod Kumar Lalwani (supra) shall be extended to the

petitioner.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 455-SanjayS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)