Termination of services without providing an enquiry report violates principles of natural justice, necessitating a fresh enquiry.

ORDER :

Since all these Writ Petitions are inter-related, this Court deems it appropriate to hear these matters together and dispose of the same by way of this Common Order.

2. The petitioners in all these writ petitions were appointed as Staff Nurses on a contract basis, pursuant to Notification No. 1 of 2023. While they were discharging their duties as Staff Nurses, the 3^rd respondent issued proceedings dated 25.04.2024 in Rc.No.SPL/A3/GTGH/MTM/2024 to some of them, calling for an explanation within 24 hours by attaching the proceedings dated 22.04.2024 issued by the 5^th respondent, alleging that the service certificates submitted by them were fake and fabricated. Consequently, proceedings were issued, terminating the services of the petitioners and others. Persons aggrieved by the aforesaid action filed W.P.Nos.10972 and 11103 of 2024 before this Court, which were allowed by a common order dated 09.05.2024, granting liberty to the respondents to proceed with the enquiry afresh. However, before proceeding with the enquiry, the respondents were directed to furnish all material documents and provide reasonable time for the petitioners to procure documents in their defence, enabling them to submit the same before the Enquiry Officer. The petitioners therein were also allowed to continue with their duties.

3. Thereafter, the 5^th respondent issued a Show Cause Notice, dated 16.05.2024, to the petitioners in the aforesaid cases, including the present writ petitioners, calling for an explanation with respect to the allegation of producing fake and fabricated documents. In response, the petitioners submitted their individual explanations to the 5^th respondent. Subsequently, the 6^th respondent, being the Enquiry Officer, issued a notice dated 04.07.2024, calling the petitioners to attend the enquiry, which was scheduled on 08.07.2024, along with the necessary documents in support of their defence. The petitioners appeared before the 6^th respondent and were asked to fill up a questionnaire in the format prepared by the 6^th respondent. Despite this, surprisingly, they were terminated from service vide proceedings in Rc.No.1045/R2A/2024, dated 18.08.2024, which was communicated to the petitioners vide letter dated 24.08.2024.

4. Assailing the termination order dated 18.08.2024 the petitioners filed W.P.No.19219 of 2024 and W.P.No.20932 of 2024. This Court, on 03.09.2024, granted interim suspension of the termination order, observing that the petitioners were not furnished with a copy of the enquiry report before the termination order was passed. This order was initially passed for a period of four (04) weeks and subsequently, it was extended from time to time.

5. Curiously, after passing the termination order, the 5^th respondent, by letter dated 21.10.2024, decided to serve the enquiry report dated 07.08.2024 on the petitioners and requested them to submit an explanation to the said report, along with any supporting documents in their defence, within a period of seven (07) days of receiving the letter. In pursuance of the interim suspension granted by this Court, the 5th respondent issued proceedings dated 09.01.2025, directing the petitioners to report to their respective places of work as on the date of termination. The 5^th respondent also directed the Superintendent of the Government Teaching General Hospital, Machilipatnam, and the 6^th respondent-Enquiry Officer-cum-District Medical and Health Officer, Krishna District, to reinstate the petitioners for a period of four weeks. Challenging the conditional order dated 09.01.2025 the petitioners have filed W.P. No. 4478 of 2025.

6. The 5^th respondent filed a counter affidavit, which was adopted by the other respondents, inter-alia submitting that the petitioners were not employed on a contract basis. They contended that the certificates submitted by the petitioners were solely for the purpose of their appointment in response to the notification. The petitioners were given a prior show-cause n