O.P. Garg, J. - (1.) In this writ petition, the moot point for consideration and determination is whether a person serving as a Company Commander, Home Guards, holds 'civil post' and is entitled to the protection of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. The facts leading to this controversy, briefly stated, are as follows.
(2.) Suraj Prasad Tiwart the petitioner, who is a graduate, was enrolled as Home Guard in the year 1987. Subsequently, looking to his sincerity, devotion to work and excellent performance, he was selected and upgraded to the post of Company Commander. He was posted as Company Commander. Home Guards in Muskara in district Hamirpur. The appointment of the petitioner as Company Commander was for a period of three years under the provisions of Section 11 (2) of the Uttar Pradesh Home Guards Adhintyam, 1963 (U. P. Act No. XXIX of 1963) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The initial period of appointment was further extended to three years to commence from 7.2.1997. The petitioner had some tiff with one Sri R. K. Chaurasla, Zila Commandant-respondent No. 5. He got certain false and fabricated complaints manipulated against the petitioner. The petitioner was surprised by an order dated 24.7.1996 alleged to have been passed in compliance of the order of the Home Guards Headquarters, U. P. dated 16.7.1996, whereby the services of the petitioner were terminated. The petitioner exactly was not in a position to visualise the grounds which resulted in his removal from service. The petitioner, therefore, filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer that the order dated 16.7.1996 and the consequential order dated 24.7.1996. which is contained in Annexure 3 to the writ petition, passed by the District Commandant, Home Guards, Hamtrpur-respondent No. 1 be quashed and the respondents be commanded not to Interfere with his functioning as Company Commander, Home Guards in Muskara in district Hamirpur.
(3.) Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged. Heard Sri R. R. Shivahare, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.;