Vidhi Awasthi v. Union Of India & ANR

$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9496/2017 & CM No.38602/2017, 38603/2017 VIDHI AWASTHI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Nikhil Bhardwaj, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Sunieta Ojha, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

% 30.10.2017 Petitioner was appointed on 9th April, 2014 as Data Entry Operator by second respondent on contractual basis for a period of one year at a consolidated salary and vide letter of 1st September, 2014 petitioner was offered temporary appointment which was likely to continue on compassionate ground and after the period of probation was complete, without there being any extension of probation, petitioner's services stands terminated vide impugned order of 5th October, 2017 (Annexure-A-1). All that is said in the impugned order is that petitioner's appointment has been found to be illegal and so her services have been discontinued as Data Entry Operator. On the very next date, i.e. 6th October, 2017 petitioner claims to have approached second respondent but she was not heard and was told to leave.

Since the reason for termination of petitioner's service is not evident W.P.(C) 9496/2017

from the impugned order, neither does it spell-out as to what the illegality was, therefore, it is deemed appropriate to permit petitioner to make a concise representation within two weeks and if such a representation is received by second respondent, the same be dealt with by passing a speaking order within four weeks thereafter and the fate of the representation be conveyed to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedy, as available in law, if need be. With aforesaid directions, this petition and accompanying applications are disposed of.

DASTI.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE OCTOBER 30, 2017 v W.P.(C) 9496/2017