A State cannot cancel the appointment of a temporary employee without following the due procedure of law.

Nishita Mhatre, J.

The grievance of the petitioner in this case is against the decision of the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in O.A.1114 of 2010. By the impugned order the application filed by the petitioner before the Administrative Tribunal for quashing the order of termination dated 4th November, 2009 and for reinstatement with all consequential benefits has been dismissed.

2. A few facts which are relevant for the determination of the dispute in the present writ petition are as follows:

The petitioner was appointed as a casual employee in 21st June, 2001 by the District Magistrate and Collector, Hooghly in a Group D post. His appointment was purely on a temporary basis. On 16th June, 2006 the petitioner’s services were terminated by the District Magistrate and Collector, Hooghly on the direction of the Assistant Secretary, Land and Land Reforms Department. The petitioner challenged this order of termination of his service by preferring Original Application being O.A. No.2455 of 2006 before the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the order of termination had not been passed by following the appropriate procedure and was in a breach of the law applicable. Accordingly, the order of termination was quashed and set aside by the Tribunal. However, it permitted the concerned authority to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

3. The petitioner was afforded a personal hearing by the District Magistrate, Hooghly in order to comply with the directions of the Administrative Tribunal. By an order dated 4th November, 2009 the District Magistrate cancelled the appointment of the petitioner with effect from 16th June, 2006. This was because the Finance Department had not approved of the appointment of the petitioner and two other persons who are appointed as Group D employees as the appointment was not against a sanctioned post.

4. It must be stated here that soon after the petitioner was issued his appointment order, the District Magistrate had informed the Joint Secretary, Land and Land Reforms Department that 3 posts of Group D in the Collectorate had been vacant from different dates from February, 2001. Accordingly, the District Magistrate found it fit to appoint the petitioner who was a casual worker in the Collectorate from 12th April, 1987. It appears that the Administrative Tribunal had in an earlier order passed in O.A. 1748 of 1998 directed that an appointment order should be issued to the petitioner. It was in these circumstances that the District Magistrate sought post facto approval so that the salary of the candidates who were in dire financial straits could be disbursed. As the salary was not paid, the petitioner approached the Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A.11 of 2003. An order was passed by the Tribunal accepting the petitioner’s version that he was entitled to be paid salary and that he had been deprived of the same for no fault of his although he had worked. The Tribunal directed the State to pay arrears of salary within six months of the order. This order was passed on 31st June, 2006.

5. The amount was not paid within the time stipulated and therefore the petitioner filed a contempt petition before the Tribunal being C.C.P. No. 1661 of 2009. The arrears were paid after 06.11.2007. However, since the petitioner’s services had already been terminated with effect from 16th June, 2006, he had to once again approach the Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 1114 of 2010 for quashing the order terminating him from service and for reinstatement with all consequential benefits. In the reply filed to that original application, the State contended that the appointment order issued to the petitioner was cancelled with effect from 16th June, 2006 because of the order dated 4th November, 2009 passed by the District Magistrate. It was further contended that the services of the petitioner had not been terminated but the appointment order had been cancelled. Therefore, he was not entit