GURCHETAN SINGH ATWAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

LAWS(P&H)-2011-2-220

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Decided on February 01,2011

Gurchetan Singh Atwal Appellant

VERSUS

State of Punjab and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Permod Kohli, J. - (1.) .M. No. 1539 of 2011.
(2.) C .M. allowed. Replication taken on record. C.W.P. No. 4948 of 2010 The petitioner has been terminated from service vide the impugned order dated 24.2.2010 (Annexure P -12) on the solitary ground of violation of Condition No. 7 of the agreement. It may be useful to notice the contents of order of dismissal (Annexure P -12) which reads as under: - "Sh. Gurchetan Singh Atwal, Teaching Fellow, Govt. Primary School, Mirzapur, Block Dhar -2 was appointed by this office as Teaching Fellow as per the conditions of the agreement. Sh. Gurchetan Singh Atwal has violated Condition No. 7 of the agreement. Therefore, the services of Sh. Gurchetan Singh Atwal are hereby terminated with immediate effect. These orders shall come into force with immediate effect." Brief facts leading to the filing of this petition are noticed as under: - The petitioner is married to one Harleen Kaur resident of Jalandhar City. The marriage was performed on 21.11.2004. Two children i.e. one son and one daughter are born out of their wedlock. Pursuant to an advertisement issued by the Education Department for filling up post of Teacher Fellow on contract basis, the petitioner applied for the same and was selected/appointed as Teacher Follow vide appointment letter dated 26.6.2009 (Annexure P -1). The petitioner submitted all the requisite documents, including the character certificate at the time of appointment. It seems that some matrimonial dispute arose between the petitioner and his wife and an FIR No. 457 dated 23.11.2009 has been registered against the petitioner at Police Station Division No. 6, Jalandhar under Sections 498 -A, 406 IPC. The petitioner was arrested in connection with the aforesaid FIR on the same date and was later released on bail on 7.12.2009. Having been released on bail, the petitioner re -joined the duty. The petitioner was issued a show -cause notice dated 11.1.2010 seeking his explanation by 14.1.2010. It is alleged that the show cause notice was received by the petitioner only on 14.1.2010. He submitted detailed reply on the same date where upon the impugned termination order has been passed. Condition No. 7 referred to in the impugned order which was incorporated in the appointment letter, reads as under: - "7. Your appointment on contract basis will be considered only after verification of your character by the District Magistrate. Even after this verification, if any complaint comes to notice regarding your character, your services can be terminated without any notice and action under civil or criminal sections can be initiated against you." Admittedly, the petitioner has not been convicted by any competent court of law. Simply on registration of an FIR and that too by the wife of the petitioner, the petitioner's services have been terminated. Mere registration of the FIR does not in any manner establish the allegations in the FIR or disprove the character of the petitioner unless the petitioner is convicted in criminal offence by competent court of law. No rule or law has been brought to the notice of this Court by the State counsel justifying the impugned order. The impugned order is per se bad in law and is liable to be set aside. This petition is accordingly allowed. Impugned order dated 24.2.2010 (Annexure P -12) is hereby set aside. Resultantly, the petitioner shall be allowed to rejoin the duly. However, the petitioner shall not be entitled to financial benefit for the period he remained out of job, though the period of termination will not be construed as break in service.;

Click here to view full judgement.