- (1.) The petitioner in this application, has, inter alia played for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to forbear from giving effect or further effect to the order dated 1.1.85 passed by the Sealor Commandant Railway Protection Force the appellate order dated 29.10.86 as contained in Annexure 'D' as also the final order dated 31.10.89 passed by the Director General, Railway Protection Force, as contained in Annexure 'J' to the writ application.
(2.) The petitioner was recruited as a Rakshak-Trainee under the Railway Protection Force Act and the Rules framed thereunder, on 25.10.83. He, in terms of an agreement entered is to by and between himself and his employers, was to undergo a training. On successful completion of training, a certificate of appointment, being No. 32802 was granted on 28.9.1984, as contained in Annexure 'A' to the writ application. He was thereafter deputed for service to Eastern Railways at the disposal of the Inspectorate Charge oi Bailygunge Unit, Railway Protection Force. However, by an order dated 1.1.85 as contained in Annexure 'B' to the writ application, bis service has been terminated purported to be in terms of Paragraph 2(a) of the agreement vide Appendix-A of Rule 23 of the R.P.F. Regulation on payment of one month's salary. The petitioner preferred an appeal there against, which was also dismissed holding that there is no provision for appeal, by an order dated 29.10.86.
(3.) The petitioner filed a writ application earlier, inter alia, on the ground that the aforementioned order of termination as contained in Annexure 'B' to the writ application was not a termination simplicitor, inasmuch as, the said order had been passed at the instance of the respondent No. 4, as he was allegedly detained in connection with an offence allegedly committed by him. The said writ application was disposed of with a direction that the petitioner may file a representation before the Director General of R.P.F., who may call for the records and treat the representation as revisional petition and dispose of the same within 8 weeks from the date of receipt thereof, after giving be opportunity of hearing. Pursuant to the said order dated 30.9.88 passed by this Court, the petitioner filed a representation on 5.10.88. The said representation of the petitioner, however, has been disposed of by the Director General, R.P.F. on 31.10.89. The said order is contained is Annexure 'J' to the writ application. A bare perusal oi the said order would show that the same has been passed on the basts that the petitioner was bound by the terms of the agreement, pursuant whereto he had agreed that his services may be terminated by the Chief Security Officer at any time during the period of his initial training or the period of probation thereof on issue of notice of one month or the tender of one month's pay in lieu of such notice. The Director General has arrived at a finding that the Senior Security Officer recommended fiat keeping in view his conduct during his training as will as during his early period of probation it was found that be is an individual or had traits which are undesirable and would come in the way of his becoming a suitable member of the uniformed force.;