Ku. Sangita Bhagat v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No.626 of 2015 Ku. Sangita Bhagat, aged about 34 years, D/o Late Shri Bhola Ram Bhagat, By Occupation Service Presently Terminated, R/o Jute Mill Kabir Chowk, Bima Colony, P.S. Jute Mill District Raigarh ---Appellant versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Labour, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Post Office and Police Station Naya Raipur District Raipur
2. Director, Employees State Insurance Service, Directorate, D/290-5, Tagore Nagar, District Raipur
3. The Superintendent, ESI Hospital, District Rajnandgaon ---- Respondents For Appellant : Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate For State/Respondents : Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Navin Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Judgment on Board Per Navin Sinha, Chief Justice 7/1/2016 1.
The present appeal arises from common order dated 28.9.2015 dismissing Writ Petition (S) No. 204 of 2015 and analogous cases (including Writ Petition (S) No.252 of 2015 by the present Appellant) declining to interfere with the order discharging the Appellant who was a probationer. 2.
I.A. No.1 of 2015 has been filed to condone delay of 2 days in filing the appeal. Considering the duration, delay is condoned. 3.
The questions of law involved for consideration have already been considered in detail by us in Writ Appeal No.599 of 2015 disposed on 15.12.2015 holding that the initial enquiry was ex parte in nature. The order of discharge treating persons like the Appellant as probationer was found to be punitive and stigmatic in nature after lifting the veil, and that the final order was at complete variance with the grounds mentioned in the show
cause notice because of which the impugned order of removal dated 19.11.2014 couched in innocuous language was set aside but without prejudice to the rights of the Respondents afresh in accordance with law. 4.
For like reasons as discussed in Writ Appeal No.599 of 2015, the present appeal is also allowed but without prejudice to the rights of the Respondents afresh in accordance with law.
Sd/- Sd/- (Navin Sinha) (P. Sam Koshy) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Subbu