RAHUL JAIN Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in the petition is for quashment of order dated 27/05/13 (Annexure P/10) issued by respondent No.6 on the recommendation dated 24/05/13 (Annexure P/9) issued by respondent No.2 and on the basis of decision dated 21/05/13 passed by District Health Committee, Khargone.

(2.) Short facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed on the post of District Programme Officer vide order dated 24/12/05 for a period of two years. The period of contractual appointment was extended vide order dated 15/04/08 for a period of one year. The period was further extended vide order dated 24/12/09 till completion of project. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was discharging his duties bonafidely right from 2005, but all of a sudden on 31/10/12 show cause notice was issued to the petitioner wherein it was alleged that why the services of the petitioner should not be terminated on account of violation of Clause-6 of agreement whereby petitioner was appointed on contractual basis. Detailed reply was filed by the petitioner on 03/11/12. After submission of reply without giving any opportunity of hearing and without holding any departmental enquiry, services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated 27/05/13.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the respondents whereby services of the petitioner were discontinued is illegal, incorrect and deserves to be quashed. It is submitted that it is true that petitioner was on contractual basis, but at the same time the services of the petitioner could have been terminated as per terms of contract. It is submitted that Clause-6 of the agreement reads as under:- <JUDIMG>1234546-2</JUDIMG>