Santosh Kumar Sonwani And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Others
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.5460 of 2008
1. Santosh Kumar Sonwani S/o. Shri Duj Ram Sonwani, Aged About 22 years, Occupation-Gram Rojgar Sahayak, R/o. Village and Post-Kapisda, Tahsil-Champa, Distt.- Janjgir Champa (CG)
2. Ku.Santoshi Chandra D/o. Shri Shiv Prasad Chandra, Aged About 20 years, Occupation-Gram Rojgar Sahayak, R/o. Village and Post-Sanjay Gram, Tahsil-Champa, Distt.Janjgir Champa (CG) ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Panchayat and Social Welfare Department D.K.S.Bhawan Mantralaya Raipur, Distt.-Raipur (CG)
2. Collector Janjgir, Distt.-Janjgir Champa (CG)
3. Chief Executive Officer, Distt.-Panchayat Janjgir Champa and Additional Zila Karyakram Samanvayak Rashtriya Gramin Rojgar Guarantee Yojana, Distt.- Janjgir Champa (CG)
4. Chief Executive officer, Janpad Panchayat Bamhnidih, Distt.Janjgir Champa (CG) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr.Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Res.No.1 and 2 :
Mr.Ravi Bhagat, Dy.G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 10.6.2021
1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken-up through video conferencing.
2. The petitioners were appointed on the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak on 29.8.2008 (Annexure P-3) for a period of one year by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bamhnidih, District Janjgir-Champa
and thereafter their services were terminated by order dated 18.9.2008 (Annexure P-1).
3. Mr.Awadh Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, would submit that the petitioners have not been afforded an opportunity of hearing and in violation of principles of natural justice, their services have been terminated.
4. On the other hand, Mr.Ravi Bhagat, learned Deputy Government Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2/State, would support the impugned order.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also went through the records with utmost circumspection.
6. It is true that the petitioners were appointed on the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak by order dated 29.8.2008 for a period of one year, but their services were terminated by order dated 18.9.2008 (Annexure P-1) without affording an opportunity of hearing, which is in violation of principles of natural justice.
7. Consequently, the impugned order dated 18.9.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No.3 is hereby set aside. However, the petitioners would not be entitled for any relief as period of one year has already been elapsed and the petitioners continued for a period of
one year by interim order of this Court.
8. The writ petition is partly allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K.Agrawal) Judge B/-