NISHITA MHATRE,J. - (1.) The grievance of the petitioner in this case is against the decision of the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in O.A.1114 of 2010. By the impugned order the application filed by the petitioner before the Administrative Tribunal for quashing the order of termination dated 4th November, 2009 and for reinstatement with all consequential benefits has been dismissed.
(2.) A few facts which are relevant for the determination of the dispute in the present writ petition are as follows: The petitioner was appointed as a casual employee in 21st June, 2001 by the District Magistrate and Collector, Hooghly in a Group D post. His appointment was purely on a temporary basis. On 16th June, 2006 the petitioner's services were terminated by the District Magistrate and Collector, Hooghly on the direction of the Assistant Secretary, Land and Land Reforms Department. The petitioner challenged this order of termination of his service by preferring Original Application being O.A. No.2455 of 2006 before the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the order of termination had not been passed by following the appropriate procedure and was in a breach of the law applicable. Accordingly, the order of termination was quashed and set aside by the Tribunal. However, it permitted the concerned authority to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.
(3.) The petitioner was afforded a personal hearing by the District Magistrate, Hooghly in order to comply with the directions of the Administrative Tribunal. By an order dated 4th November, 2009 the District Magistrate cancelled the appointment of the petitioner with effect from 16th June, 2006. This was because the Finance Department had not approved of the appointment of the petitioner and two other persons who are appointed as Group D employees as the appointment was not against a sanctioned post.;