- (1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia, prayed for quashing order dated 07.05.2007 issued by respondent no.4, pertaining to termination from services of the petitioner.
(2.) Sans details, the facts as described in the writ petition, in a nutshell is that on 21.08.2002 a meeting was convened in the village Indkanta for appointment of teachers in Utkramit Primary School, Indkanta and in the said meeting the name of the petitioner was recommended for appointment on the post of teacher, which was subsequently confirmed by the respondents-authorities. Thereafter, the petitioner continued to discharge his duties with utmost satisfaction of the authorities. But, surprisingly, in the month of May, 2007, he was terminated without any notice or show cause by Block Education Extension Officer, Chakradharpur-respondent no. 4 giving reference to a complaint made by a member of Legislative Assembly. It has further been submitted that even the said termination letter was served upon him in April, 2008, till date he continued to impart education to the students without any complain. It has further been submitted that when the salary was not paid to the petitioner, he enquired about the matter and came to know that his contract has been terminated. Thereafter, the petitioner represented before respondent no. 4, but, no response was given. However, prior to termination of the petitioner, it has been alleged that one Leela Mahato was appointed by the respondents without recommendation of the village Education Committee and without following the due procedure made for appointment.
(3.) Being aggrieved by the impugned order of termination, the petitioner having no alternative, efficacious and speedy remedy has approached this Court invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.;