V.K. Bali, J. - (1.) Petitioner, Krishan Lal Rinwa, who holds a degree of B.Sc. in the subjects of Geology, Botany and Chemistry and has also diploma in Sugar Boiling Certificate Course from the National Sugar Institute at Kanpur and was earlier employed as PH recorder in Fazilka Cooperative Sugar Mills Limited, Fazilka and later as Lab. Chemist in the said Sugar Mills, endeavoured to advance his service career when he applied for the post of Manufacturing Chemist with the Haryana Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. respondent No. 3. He applied in consequence to the advertisement for filling up the said post and was selected. He joined service in June, 1988 but vide impugned order (Annexure P-11) dated September 30, 1991 he was asked to quit on the ground that he lacks qualifications for the post on which he was appointed. It is this order depriving him of his sole source of earning bread that has been challenged in this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) Brief facts of the case reveal that after doing his B.Sc. and diploma in Sugar Boiling Certificate Course from National Sugar Institute at Kanpur, petitioner was appointed as PH Recorder 'in the Fazilka Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Fazilka (Punjab) in the year 1985. He worked on the post aforesaid upto Dec. 5, 1986 when he was appointed on a higher post of Lab. Chemist in the same very Sugar Mills vide appointment letter dated December 6, 1986. While doing the job of Lab Chemist in the Fazilka Co-operative Sugar Mills, Fazilka, an advertisement for the post of Manufacturing Chemist available with Haryana Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Rohtak respondent No. 3 came to his notice. He applied for the post and was interviewed along with other seven applicants on June 4, 1988. The selection committee was constituted of the Chief Engineer, Chief Chemist, Managing Director and two members of the Board. Out of seven candidates, who had applied for the post of Manufacturing Chemist, only four appeared for interview. The other three applicants who appeared along with petitioner were Pardeep Kumar, Suresh Kumar Goel and Vinod Kumar Singh. Insofar, as other three candidates are concerned, it is not disputed that they were having requisite qualifications which were mentioned in the advertisement itself whereas the petitioner, even though a graduate in Science, was not having the subjects that were mentioned in the advertisement i.e. Physics and Mathematics. Instead he had passed B.Sc. in Geology, Botany and Chemistry. In spite of the fact that other three candidates did possess the advertised qualifications, the attention of the Selection Committee came to be ultimately focussed upon the petitioner as keeping in view his previous experience, he was found suitable and accordingly selected for the post. He was issued appointment letter dated June 22, 1988 whereby he was to remain on probation for a period of one year. In clause 7 it was specifically mentioned that his selection and appointment was subject to the relaxation of qualifications and approval by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Haryana. It requires to be mentioned that prior to when he was issued appointment letter, an intimation was sent to him vide Annexure P-12 on June 4, 1988 that he was selected as Manufacturing Chemist on the negotiated terms and conditions and that a regular letter of appointment would be issued to him on his joining the service of the Mills. Petitioner, in the wake of his selection and appointment resigned from his earlier post of Lab. Chemist which he was holding in the Fazilka Cooperative Sugar Mills, Fazilka and joined his new assignment with respondent No. 3. The case of petitioner is that the management-respondent No. 3 had assured him that relaxation in qualifications and approval from the Registrar was a mere formality and the same would be obtained in view of the fact that he was an experienced person. In the meeting of the Establishment Committee that was held on July 20, 1988 respondent Mills considered his case and sent the same for approval to the Registrar for relaxation in the qualifications. Respondent No. 2 vide his communication dated Sept. 6, 1988 informed the respondent Mills that the post should be readvertised. On receipt of the communication, referred to above, the management of respondent No. 3 again represented to the Registrar for according approval to the appointment of petitioner as the crushing season 1988-80 was ensuing and the Mills was in a dire need of an experienced hand. The Registrar favourably considered the representation of the respondent Mills and accorded approval to the continuance of petitioner for the crushing season 1988-89. The case of petitioner, however, is that he performed his duties during the crushing season 1988-89 in a very satisfactory manner and on account of excellent job done by him, Managing Director of the Mills vide communication dated May 18, 1989 informed him that he had been allowed to continue to work on his post till further orders. Prior thereto, however, even petitioner had sent representations to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana requesting him to relax the condition of subject combination and to accord approval to his appointment keeping in view the fact that he had resigned from his previous job and that his work and conduct had been quite satisfactory. Petitioner pleads that he was under the bonafide impression that his representation had been accepted as it was only for that reason that he was allowed to continue till further orders vide communication dated May 18, 1989, copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure P-6. The impression of petitioner that qualifications in his case have been relaxed further gained on account of the fact that the respondent Mills had again advertised the post of Manufacturing Chemist and even selected one Virender Singh, who was a Chemical Engineer with no experience in the Sugar Mills. The selected candidate joined the respondent Mills but it was against another vacant post of Manufacturing Chemist. Virender Singh resigned from the said post but petitioner was allowed to continue without any interruption. The one year period of probation provided in the conditions of service spelled out from the appointment letter gone into by petitioner. It is pleaded that petitioner worked with full devotion to his duties and even worked on rest days. He was paid 29 days single wages vide order dated July 8, 1991 for working on weekly rest days. He was also granted one special increment of Rs. 60/- vide order dated July 9, 1991. In the meanwhile two more posts of Manufacturing Chemist fell vacant with the Mills. The same were advertised in August, 1991 and the selection was made on September 12, 1991. While advertising the aforesaid two posts, the post occupied by the petitioner was not advertised and no selection was made to replace him. He was granted regular increments, apart from special increment and was allowed to complete his probation period. He was also granted the revised pay scale as per recommendations of 3rd Wage Board like other employees of the Mill.
(3.) From all the facts that have been narrated above, it is pleaded that he remained under the impression that he would be allowed to continue by relaxing the qualifications. Upto this time, everything was going on alright. When Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav, HCS, Managing Director joined the respondent Mill, his tale of woes started. It is pleaded that the said Managing Director developed a disliking for the petitioner and, therefore, even though his Annual Confidential Reports for the years 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1990-91 were excellent and there was absolutely no adverse material or complaint against him or his work and conduct, the said Managing Director passed an order dated September 28, 1991 whereby the petitioner was directed to share 50% of his residential accommodation with a newly appointed Manufacturing Chemist. This, it is pleaded would have resulted into difficult living of the petitioner and his family for various reasons inclusive of that that by sharing the accommodation, he would have lost complete privacy. Letter aforesaid was conveyed to the petitioner at 11.00 a.m. on September 28, 1991 on receipt where of he met the Managing Director and requested him to withdraw the order as it was impossible for him to share the residential accommodation while living with his family. Instead of considering his request, it is pleaded that the Managing Director got annoyed and directed him to comply with the orders forthwith failing which action was to be taken against him. On the same very day i.e. 28.9.1991, the petitioner received a charge-sheet alleging that he did not clean the Evaporator set during the off-season of 1990-91 and 25% of the tubes of each body had become dirty. He was asked to submit his explanation within five days from the date of receipt of charge-sheet. Before, however, five days could expire, the Managing Director on 30.9.1991 terminated the services of the petitioner with immediate effect on the ground that he did not possess the educational qualifications for the post of Manufacturing Chemist and inasmuch as there had been no relexation in the qualifications, his services could be terminated according to clause 6 of the appointment letter. It is this order, as referred to above, that has been challenged in the present petition.;