In cases of punitive or stigmatic order of termination of services, a full-fledged departmental inquiry is necessary.

ORDER :

VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.

1. This appeal is filed under Section 15 of the Letters Patent by the appellants-original respondents, challenging the judgment and order, Dated: 16.02.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 17145 of 2019, whereby, the petition filed by the original petitioner-opponent, herein, came to be allowed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the opponent came to be appointed on the post of Sub- Registrar, Grade-II, Class-III, vide order dated 17.12.2013, on fixed term basis by appellant No.2.

2.1 It appears that in the year 2018, an FIR, being, C.R. No. 15/2018, came to be registered against the Opponent with ACB Police Station, Gandhinagar, for the offence punishable under Sections 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in brief, ‘the Act’).

2.2 Pursuant to the registration of the aforesaid FIR, the services of the opponent came to be terminated vide order dated 21.01.2019, by placing reliance on Condition No.12 of the appointment order of the opponent.

2.2.1 Condition No.12 of the appointment order dated 17.12.2013 provides that during the tenure of engagement of the opponent, if, her services are found to be unsatisfactory or any kind of misconduct is committed by her, her services are liable to be terminated without issuance of any notice.

2.3 It appears that after the termination of the services of the opponent, she filed the captioned petition, wherein, the learned Single Judge passed the impugned order, directing the appellants to reinstate the opponent in service within some stipulated time. Hence, the present appeal.

3. Heard, learned AGP, Mr. Desai, for the appellants and learned Advocate, Mr. Patel, for the Opponent.

4. Learned AGP, Mr. Desai, appearing for the Appellants submitted that the services of the opponent came to be terminated in consonance with Condition No. 12 of the appointment order dated 17.12.2013, which provides that, if, her services are found to be unsatisfactory or any kind of misconduct is committed by her, her services are liable to be terminated without issuance of any notice, and therefore, there was no need to either issue any notice to the opponent or to conduct any departmental inquiry against her.

4.1 Learned AGP submitted that in view of the specific provisions of Condition No.12 of the appointment order of the opponent, the learned Single Judge wrongly placed reliance on the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, Dated: 24.07.2020, in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1596 of 2019. It was, therefore, urged that the present appeal be allowed.

5. On the other hand, learned Advocate, Mr. Patel, appearing for the opponent strongly opposed this appeal and submitted that the services of the opponent came to be terminated only on the basis of registration of the FIR and the said issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24.07.2020 and therefore, the learned Single Judge rightly placed reliance on the same.

5.1 It was, further, submitted that so far as the aspect of registration of the FIR is concerned, the opponent was granted anticipatory bail by the concerned Court in regard to the same. It was also submitted that, after carrying out investigation in the said FIR, the concerned Investigating Agency has filed summary. It was, therefore, submitted that the learned Single Judge committed no error in passing the impugned judgment and order.

5.2 Learned Advocate, Mr. Patel, in support of his submissions placed reliance on the recent decision of this Court, rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No. 300 of 2023. In the said matter also an FIR was registered against the concerned petitioner under the provisions of the aforesaid Act, whose services came to be terminated, and he when approached this Court, the learned Single Judge allowed the said petition. When the order of the learned Single Judge was challenged by way of Letters Patent Appeal No. 300 of 2023, the same also came to be dismissed by the Divis