The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to follow the principles of natural justice and conduct a departmental enquiry before terminating the services of employees. The judgment also highlights the importance of complying with relevant rules and acts, such as the Panchayat Shiksha Panchayat Recruitment and Service Condition Rules 2012, Right to Free Education to Children Act, 2009, and Article 311 of the Constitution of India.

ORDER :

1. The petitioners have preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by order dated 18.09.2015 (Annexure P/5) passed by Respondent No.2/Commissioner, Bastar Division, Jagdalpur (C.G.), whereby the appeal against removal of the petitioners from service preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 12.08.2014 passed by the Collector, Uttar Bastar, Kanker, has been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the petitioners, are that earlier the petitioners were working as Guruji, whose services were discontinue by the Govt. Against the discontinuation order, the employees filed the petition before this Hon'ble Court and the Hon'ble Court was pleased to dispose of the petition. Some of the petitioners had also filed writ petition bearing W.P.(S) No.1077/13 and W.P.(S) No. 2274/13 before this Hon'ble Court and the Hon'ble Court was pleased to dispose off the petition with direction to respondents to consider the case of he petitioners. Thereafter, after following due process of law, the petitioners were appointed vide Annexure P/2 by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Narharpur. The petitioners had given joining and worked with utmost sincerity and devotion. Thereafter, on 26/8/2013, the services of the petitioners were terminated on the ground that the petitioners do not fulfill the requisite qualification as per Panchayat Shiksha Panchayat Recruitment and Service Condition Rules 2012, without giving any opportunity/show cause notice as to whether they are eligible or not and further no opportunity was granted to the petitioners to fulfill the requisites qualification as per the circular of the State Government. Being aggrieved by the order of removal, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Collector, Uttar Bastar, Kanker, which was rejected vide order dated 12.08.2014 (Annexure P/4). Against the order dated 12.08.2014, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Respondent No. 2/Commissioner, Bastar Division, Jagdalpur, raising all the grounds, which was also dismissed by Respondent No.2 vide order dated 18.09.2015 (Annexure P/5), without application of mind, without considering the legal and factual ground & just reproduced the order of the Respondent No.3 and not even changed the words of the orders of Respondent No. 2. Hence, the present writ petition by the petitioners for the following relief(s):-

“I. Quash/set aside the order dated 18.09.2015 (Annexure P/5) issued by the respondent No. 2 and consequentially all orders of the respondents authority be set aside, which was passed against the petitioners removing them from the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade 3 (now known as Assistant Teacher Panchayat) and confirming it in appeal.

II. Direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioners alongwith all the back wages and all other consequential and other benefit to the petitioners on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade 3 (now known as Assistant Teacher Panchayat)

III. Direct the respondents to produce the entire record pertaining to petitioner case.

IV. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and the cost of the petition may be awarded in favour of the petitioner.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the Respondent No.4 and 5 confirming the order of Respondent No.2 and 3 are illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and with the malafide intention. Before passing the order of removal, no reasonable and fair opportunity was given to the petitioners and no departmental enquiry has been conducted nor any opportunity has been given to the petitioner for producing their defence on the allegation made by the respondents or to cross examine the witnesses. Learned counsel further submits that the order of respondents in removing the petitioners from service h