Temporary employees are entitled to a departmental enquiry before termination in cases of misconduct, and the provisions allowing termination of a probationer without a departmental enquiry do not apply to temporary servants.

Per V.K. BARDE, J.:---The case of the petitioner is as follows.

2. He was appointed as driver in Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad, as per the appointment letter dated 28-8-1984 after conducting interview and other formalities. Along with him, other 24 candidates were appointed as drivers. He resumed duty on 31-8-1984 at Primary Health Centre, Shivoor, Taluka Vaijapur. The appointment was for the period of one year and it stood terminated after the expiry of the period. But, then again, he was appointed for one more year with effect from 1-9-1985.

3. A circular was issued by the District Health Officer—respondent No. 3- on 23/27-1-1986 and all the officers and other employees of the Zilla Parishad were prohibited from driving the vehicles of Zilla Parishad either in the absence of the drivers or in the presence of the drivers. The drivers were also directed that they should not allow any officer or any other employee of the Zilla Parishad to drive the vehicle without prior permission; and it was further directed that, if it was noticed that the driver had allowed any officer or employee to drive the vehicle, action would be taken against the driver.

4. Shri Phadnis was in charge Primary Health Centre, Shivoor. He always wanted to take the vehicle for his private work and to drive the vehicle personally. The petitioner did not allow him to do so because of the circular. So, Shri Phadnis had a grudge against him. The nurses working at the Primary Health Centre, Shivoor, Miss Patil, Miss Choudhari, Mrs. Wagh and Mrs. Tamboli, at the instance of Shri Phadnis, lodged a false complaint against the petitioner on 7-4-1986. The petitioner has contended that Mrs. Tamboli and Mrs. Chavan wanted to visit Aurangabad along with the President of the Mahila Mandal, taluka Vaijapur and Smt. Bidait. They asked the petitioner to take them to Aurangabad by the vehicle of the Primary Health Centre, but the petitioner refused to take the vehicle for their personal work and also told them that there was shortage of diesel. So, all these lady employees had a grudge against the petitioner and because of that, the complaint dated 7-4-1986 was made against him. It was altogether false complaint. The petitioner had taken many of the employees and other persons to Shri Deshpande, Assistant District Health Officer, to record their statements with respect to the complaint. The members of the staff, as well as the Presidents of Mahila Mandals, Parola and Limbgaon, had given statements in writing that the petitioner did not misbehave with the nurses. The petitioner had requested Shri Deshpande that, if any enquiry was to be held, then he be heard. However, Shri Deshpande did not record the petitioner's statement .

5. No charge-sheet was served on the petitioner. His explanation was not called for. No proper department enquiry was held against him. However, on 12-5-1986, notice of termination of his service was served upon him, informing him that his services were being terminated with effect from 5-6-1986.

6. The petitioner thereafter approached the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad and requested him to reinstate him in the service. However, he was not reinstated. He, therefore, preferred an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad; and in the beginning, an order was passed staying the operation of the notice of termination of service till 18-6-1986. However, thereafter, his services stood terminated. He was paid the salary of 20 days. The Additional Commissioner heard the appeal and dismissed the same by his order dated 28-1-1987. The petitioner received that order on 6-2-1987. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order of dismissal and the decision in appeal.

7. The basic contention of the petitioner is that no enquiry was held against him as per Rules 4 and 6 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad District Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1964 Rules”). No proper charge

Click Here to Read the rest of this document