Allowed

Ch a Kumar v. Executive Engineer and 2 Others

Telangana HC29 Aug 2023WP/4135/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the respondent passed an order terminating the petitioner's services without issuing notice or giving a hearing, violating principles of natural justice. invoking Articles 14, 16, and 21. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed and the parties were given liberty to take appropriate steps after involving due procedure.

Ch a Kumar Vs Executive Engineer and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

[³³⁰³ ]

I l ! : I I

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 4135 OF 2017

¶9

Between

¶10

CH Anji Kumar, S/o.Ch.Sammaiah, aged 28 years, Office Subordinate (now terminated), O/o. Executive Engineer, l.B Division, Jangaon, Jangaon District.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

The Executive Engineer and District lrrigation Officer, Jangaon District, Jangaon.

¶14

The Superintending Engineer, I&CAD , lrrigation Circle, Warangal.

¶15

The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, I & CAD Department, Telangana Secrelariat, Hyderabad.

¶16

D.Bikshapathi, S/o Chandraiah, Aged about 40 Years, Unemptoyee, R/o H.No. 4/l5,Paidipally Village,Hanmakonda Mandal, Warangal District.

¶17

(R4 is lmpleaded as per C.O dt.2010212020 in lA 512017)

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the 2nd Respondent in No.SE/lC/Wg1/ES/E2l117lM daled 3-2-2017 in terminating the servicers of the petilioner of the as Office Subordinate as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and article 14,1 6 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia, and consequently declare that the Petitioner is entitled to continue in service without there being any break and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon.ble High Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶20

t.A. NO:2OF 2017(\ryPMP.^{NO:4966 0F 2017)}

¶21

Petition undt: Sectton^{151CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filecl n supporl of^{thc petition,the High courtmaybe pleasedto} suspend the operation^{of the orders passedby the 2ndrespondentin} Proceedings No SE, lC/Wgl^{iEslE-Z.117lMdated 3-2-2017with a direction to} continue the service:;^{of the petitioneras office Subordinate pending disposal of} the above writ Pelit on^{and to pass suchother order or orders as this Hon.ble} High Court may det:rr^{fit and properin the circumstancesof the case'}

¶22

LA. NO:1O F^{2017(V1',VMP.NO:1896 0F 2017)}

¶23

Between

¶24

The Execut ve^{Engineerancl District lrrigation Officer, JangaonDistrict'} Jangaon.

¶25

The Superrrrtending^{Engineer. l&CAD, lrrigation Circle, Warangal}

¶26

The State^c1 Te^{angana,, Represented by its Pnncipal Secretary,I & CAD} Department, Telangana^{Secretariat,Hyderabad}

¶27

....PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶28

And

¶29

CH Anji Kumar S/o Ch.Sammaiah,^{aged 28 years, OfficeSubordinate} (now terminated) O/o. Executive Engineer,^{l.B Division,Jangaon, Jangaon} District.

¶30

...RESPONDENT/WRIT^PETITIONER

¶31

Petitiont-nderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed in support of the petition, the High courtmay be} pleased to vacate the^lnterim order^{dated:08.02.2017in wPIMP No.4966/2017in} WP.No.4135/2017

¶32

Counsel for the Petitioner^{: SRl. P V RAMANA}

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.1 to 3 : AGP FORSERVICES-II}

¶34

Counsel for the Respordent No.4 : SRI NAYAKWADI^RAMESHREP. SRI RAVINDER ALIKUCHI The Court made the following: ORDER

¶35

,//

¶36

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENryAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.4135 of 2OLZ

¶37

ORDER

¶38

This writ petition is filed seeking following relief:

¶39

"...to issue a Writ Order or direction more in [he nature of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the Z"d Rcspondent in No.SE/tClWg1lE S/E2/1,L7 /M aarea OZ.OZ.ZOII in terminaring rhe services of the petitioner as Office Subordinate as illegal, arbitrar,rr and in 'roration of principres of naturar justice and articre 14 16 and 2 i of rhc Constitution of India and consequently declare that the petitioncr ts er)tttled to continue in service without there being any break.. .,

¶40

Heard Sri p.V. Ramana, learned counsel lor the petitioner and learned Assistant Government pleader for Services - II appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Nayakwadi Ramesh, learned counsel representing Sri Ravinder Alkuchi, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

¶41

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste Community and he tvas appointed as office subordinate on 2g.OT .2O 16. The minimum qualification prescribed for the said post is VIItr, class. The petitioner passed Xrh crass in the year 2o05 and Intermediate in 20O9. Subsequent to his appointment, respondent No.2 addressed a letter dated 02.07.20 16 to the District Educational Officer for verification ol_ VIIth Class

Certiiicate.^{T lc 1)ctltroncr produced tl-le VII'I' (l1assCertificate} stating^{that lrc stutireci rrt Sri Vivekavardhini AidedSchool'} Nalsampet.^{W arar-iqari{'SL rb-ject School' for} brevity)' Respondent^{lilo ')rr'iihoL-tr tssuing any noti<:e and without} t o^{Li-re petitioner issr'rcd proceedings} giving^{an1' ol} 'portunlt' uicle^{No.Str/lC/\tuqi/ltSl 1" 211'17 lm datedO3'O2'2017} termlnating^{t hcscrvii:c sI 'i lhe petitioneron the alleged} ucational^{Officersubmittedthe} ground^{therr thc Distri'::rf'C} Class^{Tabulationar-rd Admission} report^{statil.r.ll that the /ilrlr} Register^{atlrl cot-rc:ernccl:'r c:ords of the pet.itionerare not} found^{in the sub-iecr schot'lanrl lirrther s1-ated that the Vilth} Classcertificateproduct,dbythepetitiorrerisfake.Tlte impugned^{or<ler ptrssed bi respondent No 2 is clear violation} of principles^{of natltraljr-lsticeand the sarmeis contraryto} 1au'.

¶46

Per^{Contra'Iearllcci Assistant GovernmentPleader} was appointed^asoffice submits^{th:,t thePel ltroner} Subordinat<:^{in lhe bacl<lc)q vacancy of the SchcduledCaste} dated^{28.07.20 16' In the said} servlce 1fip6rr^gl-t Procec'rlin^gs

¶47

¶48

appolntment order, the specific condition enumerated is that the appointment of the petitioner is purely temporary basis and liable for termination at any time without any prior notice and without assigning any reasons thereof, and further contended that the VIIrh Class certificate produced by the petiLioner \r/as sent for verification and after obtaining the report from the District Educational Officer as well as Mandal Educarional Officer, it is found that the said certificate is fake. Respondent No.2 has rightry terminated the services of the petitroner through impugned order dated O3.O2.2017 and there is no illegality or irregurarity in the said order.

¶49

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4 also reiterated the very sarne submissions and also contended that respondent No.4 is the next meritorious candidare and he is entitled to the said post.

¶50

Having considered the rival submissions made by respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it clearly reveals that the petitioner was appointed as office subordinate in the backlog vacancy of the Scheduled

¶51

¶52

¶53

caste tlrrough proccr:cr'rgs crerLcd 28.07.2or6 a.d further reveals th 1t rhe l)ci-ittol.(.r iilecl VII,n Class Memorandum of Marks cer ificatc as s.c,ll as Secondary Scl-rool Memorandum ol Mar-ks is sut:d b-r. Boar-ri of Secondary Education along with the rvrit p.tition, thotrslr lor the post of office subordinate Vilth Class qualilicatron is sufficient. Responcient No.2 terminated the scn,ir:es r.,l' the petitioner through impugned proceedings dated 03.t;2.2O17 basing on the report submitted lry Disrrict r'rcrLrcationar orficer dated 29.o9.2016 wherein it is star cd th aL tlre VIIth Class tabulation and Admission rt:gister a,,<1 corce.ned records are not found in the records ,f Subject Scr:.o1 i.e., Sri vivekavardhini Aided School, Nars: mpet, lVariutg.rl.

¶54

It is ,_-ry mtrch r.ele'.,t to mention here that before termination o1'the sr:rviccs of the petitioner, respondent No.2 has not given an_r, noticc or opportunity to the petitioner and passed impug;red order clatccl 03.02.2O1T solely basing on the report su)mitted lx. tlrc District Educational ofhcer. Hence, the im.:ugned orcic-r passed by respondent No.2 is

¶55

¶56

( I

¶57

clear violation of principles of natural justice.

¶58

8 The l-ion'bie Apex Court in tldit Narcrin Singh Malpaharia a. Ad.dl. Member Board of Reaenuet, relying upon the juclgment in l{tng u, Lond,on Countg Councll [(1931) 2 rtB 27s, 24sJ herd that No order adverse to a party should be passed u.ithout hearing them, which reads as follows:

¶59

'Wherever anr. body oI persons (1) having legal authority (2) ro determine questions affectir dut' ro act s udrciary,-, "",-,"'::::""t il.oi:l","11i j.J,ffi^-jr; writ of certiorari ma1, issue, will be seen from the ingredients of Judicial act that there -u",^" thererore, exerci s in g " j, di"i:: j. i:]"ffi':::."1T J;1" J llrll against the rights of a party without giving him a hearing or an opportunity to reprcsent his r ""t^{tn the mannerknownto law} II the provlsions of a particular ",. provide ror it, principres "r':::,:: r::::l:L::'f T:,"TJ order made r'ithout hearing the aflected parties would be void. As a writ of certiorari \vill be granted to remove the record of proceedings of an inferior tribunal or at hority exercising judicial or quasijudiciar acts, ex hgpothtresi t' tot'o*" that the High court in exercising its jurisdiction "nu, I also act judicially in disposing of the proceedings before it.

¶60

In the case on hand, respondent No.2 passed the

¶61

'^{AIR 1963SC786}

¶62

¶63

impugned^{orrler datcdO3'O) 2017 rvitl-toutg; r'ir-ri1notice and} opporturnitv^{tc the pctit'it)tl(r and tlrc :;ame i; clearrriolatiou} of principles^{of natural Jtlsticcand thc sante i; liableto be set} asicle'Acco.dirrgl],'sctaside'Horr'ever,thcreSpondenl authorities^{are grantcd iiber-t! to takcappropr-rale steps aftel} lollolving^{dtlr: proccclurcas l)rescl'ibed ut-rderlau' by gtvtng} notice and^{opportullily lo the petitioner'}

¶64

10.^{With tlic abovc tlirect I(rns'LIlerr rit pctirlol'r is disposed}

¶65

of. No^costs

¶66

As a serluel^{thereto' nrisceilaneous applic:ations'if any'}

¶67

pending in^{thr s u'rit petition shallstandclosed'}

¶68

SD/.K. SREERAMA^MURTHY ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

t I

L]D/.

//TRUE COPY//

SECT]ON OFFICER

To, 1. The Executive^{Engineer and District lrrigationOfficer'JangaonDistrict'} Jangaon.

¶74

Z. in"'srp.rintend^{ng Engrneer' l&CAD ,' lrrigation Circle' Warangal'} 5. fne^{piincipallleiretary, I& CAD Department'State of Telangana"} Telangana^{Secretariat,HYderabad}

¶75