M.L.Bhat - (1.) THE petitioners who are 19 in number are said to have been appointed on Class IV post on the recommendation of a selection committee on 31-12-88. THE petitioners are said to have undergone medical examination and obtained fitness certificate and thereafter, joined on their respective posts at the District Training Centre Homeguards at Haldwani.
(2.) BY a Government order the State government established District Training Centres for Homeguards in different districts of State including district Nainital. A centre was to be established at Haldwani for the district Nainital. 19 posts of class IV category were sanctioned for the Centre. That is reflected by order dated 21-11-88 Applications were invited for filling up the posts. The petitioners have applied and they came to be selected and appointed. On 27-1-89 the respondents are said to have terminated the services of the petitioners. The petitioners have challenged the said order through the medium of the writ petition. It is avered that the impugned order of termination of petitioners' services is against the principle of natural justice. No opportunity was given to the petitioners of being heard before they were terminated from the service. The impugued order merely states that the petitioners services were no more required. The petitioners say that after having been appointed against clear vacancy they could not be terminated from service. There posts are still vacant and continue. The respondents want to fill up the posts by making fresh appointment on the said posts. The petitioners have stated that on the ground of favourtism some other persons are being selected and appointed on the posts, otherwise there was no need to make fresh appointment.
(3.) IN their counter respondents have denied the assertion of the petitioners stated by them in the writ petition. IN paragraph 11 of the counter- affidavit the respondents have stated as under ;- "That the contents of paragraph 10 of the writ petition are incorrect and not admitted and in reply the facts already stated in reply to paragraph 7 of the writ petition may be perused. The appointments of the petitioners were illegal and invalid from the very beginning in as much as the Selection Committee which made selection was illegal and not constituted in accordance with the Rules and it was comprised of only three members and no member of Scheduled Caste attended the meeting. IN case of Rameshwar Singh, petitioner No. 12, it may be mentioned here that he did not submit the required medical certificate. As such his appointment could not have been made in absence of proper certificate. Thus the entire procedure of selection of the petitioners giving appointment was illegal and arbitrary and against the Rules and relevants orders pertaining to the selection." On the basis of this assertion learned counsel for the petitioners stated that it is not a case of termination simplicter. The petitioners' appointment was found invalid and illegal; constitution of selection committee was also found invalid, therefore, it was necessary for the respondents to afford an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard.;