- (1.) THE petitioner in the instant writ application has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ for quashing the order No. F. No.2 -16/ 2007 -TS.VI dated 9.4.2008 (Annexure 2) issued under the signature of the Deputy Secretary of the Government of India (Respondent No.2) by which the petitioner has been repatriated to his parent cadre and has been directed to hand over charge of his office to the respondent No.5. A further prayer has been made for quashing the corresponding order No. F. No. 216/2007 -TS.VI dated 9.4.2008 (Annexure 3) whereby the respondent No. 5 has been directed to assume additional charge of the post of Director, National Institute of Foundry and Forge Technology, (NIFFT), Ranchi for a period of six months with effect from the date of assumption of charge.
(2.) FACTS of the petitioner's case in brief are as follows : - (a) The petitioner was holding the substantive post of Professor of Metallurgy under the West Bengal General Service in the Government College of Engineering and Ceramic Technology, Kolkata, West Bengal. (b) Pursuant to an advertisement, the petitioner had applied for and was appointed on the post of Director, National Institute of Foundry and Forge Technology, (NIFFT), Ranchi after due approval of the Appointment Committee of Cabinet (A.C.C.) for a period of five years in the pay scale of Rs. 18,400 -500 -22,400/ - with effect from the date of assumption of charge of the post or until further orders, whichever is earlier. (c) Pursuant to the appointment order dated 27/28.03.2006 (Annexure1), the petitioner joined on the aforesaid post and was discharging his duties. (d) Though the petitioner was discharging his duties to the satisfaction of all concerned, but on account of certain irregularities being pointed out by the petitioner and on account of objections raised by the petitioner in the working of the Chairman, the respondent No. 4 had felt aggrieved and was in the attempt to remove the petitioner from his post. (e) The petitioner received the impugned order issued under the signature of respondent No. 2 by which it was communicated that the petitioner was repatriated to his parent cadre and he was directed to hand over charge of his office to the respondent No. 5. (f) Vide annexure -3, issued under the signature of the Deputy Secretary, Government of India (Respondent No. 2), the respondent No.5 was entrusted with the additional charge of the post of Director, NIFFT, Ranchi. The grievance of the petitioner is that prior to the issuance of the impugned order (Annexure -2), no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and the additional charge given to the respondent No. 5 was on the basis of pick and choose. The further grievance of the petitioner is that according to his information obtained from reliable sources, approval of the Appointment Committee of Cabinet (A.C.C.) was not obtained prior to the issuance of the impugned orders (Annexures 2 and 3).
(3.) MR . Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner explains that there is no allegation whatsoever against the petitioner in respect of his performance of work. No reason whatsoever has been assigned by the respondents for curtailing the tenure of the petitioner's posting though under the original terms of appointment, the petitioner was entitled to continue for a period of five years from the date of his assuming office.;