Chuman Oraon vs Birsa Agriculture University and anr.

Pramath Patnaik, J. - In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia, prayed for quashing of order dated 13.06.2014 whereby services of the petitioner has been terminated and also for direction upon the respondents to forthwith reinstate the petitioner in services with all consequential benefits.

The factual matrix, as delineated in the writ application, is that initially the petitioner served the respondents-authorities for about 20 years as daily-wager and thereafter an advertisement no. 1 of 2008 dated 20.04.2008 was published in local daily newspaper ''Prabhat Khabar'', to which the petitioner applied and on being found eligible, he was selected vide order 21.05.2011 and accordingly the petitioner gave his joining. While continuing as such, the petitioner was served with a letter dated 30.07.2012, by respondent no. 2 for submission of explanation with regard to various irregularities made in appointments in Birsa Agricultural University and questionnaire was served upon the petitioner. In response thereof, the petitioner responded vide letter dated 01.08.2012. But, after lapse of 1 and 1/2 years, to the utter dismay, the petitioner was issued impugned order of dismissal from services along with other employees on the basis of report of One Man Judicial Commission, headed by Hon�ble Mr. Justice Vikramaditya Prasad, (Retd).

Being aggrieved by the impugned order of termination, the petitioner, left with no alternative, efficacious and speedy remedy, have approached this Court invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.

Heard Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms Nehala Sharmin, learned counsel for the respondents-University and J.C to AAG for the respondents-State.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner at the very outset submitted that the very issue has been decided by this Hon''ble Court vide Judgment/Order dated 19.02.2016 in W.P.(S) No. 3213 of 2014 and analogous cases and after quashing the impugned order of termination, the petitioners have been directed to be reinstated in service forthwith.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents conceded to the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner.

Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the judgment rendered in the case of W.P.(S) 3213 of 2014 and analogous cases, it would be apposite to dispose of the instant writ petition in terms of the judgment passed in W.P. (S) 3214 of 2014 dated 19.02.2016.

Hence, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in services on his post forthwith. However, liberty is reserved with the respondents to initiate de novo proceedings, if so legally advised.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.