VIJAY AMRATBHAI UTSAV Vs. COMMISSIONER OF HIGHER EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who has appeared as party-in-person, has challenged the order dtd. 24/11/2020 by which his contractual service as an Assistant Lecturer has been put to an end.

(2.) Facts in brief would indicate that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Lecturer on a contract basis at the Government Arts College, Maandal. He joined his duties on 14/7/2016. By a letter dtd. 24/7/2017, the petitioner was transferred to the Government Arts and Commerce College, Sami - respondent no. 3. He resumed his duties on 8/5/2017. He made representations from time to time that his posting be changed to some place near Ahmedabad as his mother was ailing and he was the only caretaker. It is the case of the petitioner that despite having made requests for rental accommodations at the place of his posting, he was not being given accommodation, as a result of which it was becoming difficult for him to serve at Sami.

(3.) Dr. Vijay Utsav, party-in-person, apart from making arguments on merits has submitted that the order of termination putting an end to his contractual appointment was stigmatic inasmuch as it was based on an internal inquiry report dtd. 7/10/2020 and reading the order would indicate that it was based on the assertion that the petitioner had committed misconduct. Termination on this ground, therefore, was in violation of principles of natural justice without holding an inquiry and therefore the order of termination must be set aside.