1
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10954/2009
Mahendra Kumar Prajapat. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10954/2009
Mahendra Kumar Prajapat.
vs.
State of Rajasthan and others.
DATE OF ORDER: 21.11.2009
HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J.
Mr.JVS Deora, for the petitioner.
——
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner was given appointment under
agreement Annex.2 and then the petitioner was
served with the notice Annex.4 dated 23.6.2009
wherein there are 7 serious allegations against
the petitioner. The petitioner’s counsel submitted
that this notice was replied by the petitioner but
the copy of the reply is not placed on record and
according to learned counsel for the petitioner,
that copy is not available with the petitioner.
Then the petitioner was again given notice on
2
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10954/2009
Mahendra Kumar Prajapat. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
4.7.2009 and from this, it appears that the
petitioner admitted on earlier occasion that he
will not repeat the misconduct again. The
petitioner then submitted his reply Annex.6
wherein he submitted that some of the wrong has
been remedied and now he will not commit a mistake
again. The explanation given by the petitioner was
not found sufficient for continuation of his
services and the petitioner’s service has been
terminated as per condition no.6(1) of the
contract.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that no enquiry was conducted and without there
being any enquiry, the petitioner’s service has
been terminated.
I considered the submissions of learned
counsel for the petitioner and perused the
documents placed on record.
It is clear that serious allegations were
levelled against the petitioner and he was given
opportunity to submit his plea but as per the plea
3
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10954/2009
Mahendra Kumar Prajapat. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
submitted by the petitioner, he virtually admitted
his misconduct and his explanation, whatever it
may be, was not found satisfactory and thereafter,
his services were terminated. The principle of
natural justice has been complied with and,
therefore, I do not find any illegality in the
impugned order.
Consequently, this writ petition, having no
merits, is hereby dismissed.
(PRAKASH TATIA), J.
S.Phophaliya/-