N.N.TIWARI, J. - (1.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order issued by the Additional Secretary to the Government State of Jharkhand by his Memo No. 997, dated 1.4.2004 whereby the petitioner has been terminated from service after about 21 years of his appointment on the ground that the letter of appointment issued to the petitioner was not issued by the competent authority.
(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as "Janjir Vahak" vide letter of appointment dated 16.9.1983 issued by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Sone Project, Aurangabad as contained in Annexure -1. By an order issued by the Director, Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation Department, Government of Bihar by his Memo No. 18, dated 6.1.1989, the petitioner was given promotion to the post of "Mapak" (Amin) along with several other persons. The petitioner 's name appeared at Sl. No. 38 of the said order. Suddenly by letter No. 14(2) Estt. Dated 13.2.2004 issued by the Additional Secretary to the Government Department of Water Resources, a show -cause notice was issued to the petitioner asking him as to under what authority, Special Land Acquisition Officer had issued his initial appointment letter. The petitioner submitted his reply explaining the authority and other circumstances, but the same held to be not satisfactory and the said order of punishment was passed, terminating the petitioner from his service vide order dated 1.4.2004 (Annexure -12). A counter -affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, contesting the writ application and stating, inter alia, that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief prayed for in the writ application as the initial appointment of the petitioner was not in consonance with the prescribed Rules/procedure and that of the provision of Article 16 of the Constitution. However, it has been stated in paragraph No. 7(ii)(a) of the counter\affidavit that the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Water Resources Department, Patna had power to issue appointment letter for the post of Grade -III and IV of the Establishment against the sanctioned post in accordance with the guidelines and principles laid down by letter No. 53, dated 18.2.1978. Subsequently the said letter was modified by letter No. 7836, dated 2.12.1983 whereby the approval of the Director, Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation was made necessary. It was stated that the petitioner was provisionally appointed on temporary basis on the post of "Chain Man" by the Special Land acquisition Officer, Sone Project, Aurangabad on the condition that his services may be terminated without any notice. It was further stated that in appointing the petitioner, back door method was adopted. On the said allegation, an enquiry was set up by the Water Resources Department against the petitioner wherein his appointment was held to be violative of Article 16 of the Constitution.
(3.) FROM perusal of Annexure -3, the show -cause issued to the petitioner alleging his appointment to be illegal on the grounds : (1) the appointment letter was issued by the then Special Land Acquisition Officer, Sone Project, Aurangabad, was purely temporary (ii) The said Special Land Acquisition Officer had no authority to issue appointment letter and thus the same was issued without jurisdiction and (iii) The procedures of appointment were not followed. By Annexure -12, the petitioner 'sservices has been terminated on the ground that the reply to the show -cause filed by the petitioner was not satisfactory and though the obtained appointment in collusion with the officials without following prescribed procedure his appointment was made when there was restriction on making such appointment and in similar circumstance the High Court has held that the appointments made contrary to the established procedure is illegal. It is thus evident that the main cause on the basis of which the notice was issued to the petitioner by Annexure -3 was shown to be the lack of authority and power of the Special Land Acquisition Officer in issuing appointment letter to the petitioner but the order of termination of the petitioner 'sservices has been passed on different grounds by Annexure -12.;