The court upheld the interim protection for the petitioner, emphasizing the need to maintain status quo pending resolution of the dismissal order challenge.

ORDER :

01. The instant petition is by way of second round of litigation. The petitioner has already filed a writ petition, which was registered as WP(C) 1872/2023 whereby he has challenged order dated 15.07.2023 passed by respondent no. 4, vide which he was directed to handover the charge of the office of Chowkidar to respondent no. 5. The specific case of the petitioner in the aforesaid petition was that since he was working for more than 29 years as Chowkidar in Village Tagood and Mulchitter in terms of Chowkidari Act on the strength of order dated 01.09.1994, on the post which has fallen vacant due to death of respondent no. 3 and in pursuance to the recommendation of respondent no. 4, therefore he continued to perform his duties, as such, uninterruptedly and without any hindrance for more than 29 years.

02. It was the specific case of the petitioner in the aforesaid petition that the order dated 15.07.2023 has been issued by respondent no. 3 with a view to accommodate the private respondent and this Court, after feeling prima facie satisfied with the plea of the petitioner, stayed the impugned order dated 15.07.2023, which continued to be in operation till 07.08.2024 and when the aforesaid petition came to be dismissed as withdrawn by this Court in the following manner:-

“While confronting the said situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he was not provided the order of dismissal and it was only when the stand was taken by the respondents that he came to know that the said order has been passed and, accordingly, he seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the instant petition with a liberty to approach this Court again and challenge the order of dismissal, which has been placed on record as Annexure-I along with the instant petition. The prayer made by the petitioner is allowed and the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

Since the petitioner has already been protected by this Court vide order dated 24.07.2024, which continues to be in force till today, the same is further extended by one week with a view to allow the petitioner to challenge the said order of dismissal by way of appropriate proceedings. It is made clear that continuation of the interim direction will be subject to the further orders to be passed by the Court in subsequent petition, if any, filed by the petitioner.”

03. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that he was not provided the order of dismissal by the respondents and the order has been issued back dated and as and when the petitioner came to know about the passing of same, he has withdrawn the earlier petition with a liberty to challenge the same through the medium of the instant petition and this is how the order of dismissal has been challenged by the petitioner in the instant petition.

04. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner continued to be protected by this Court on the strength of interim order dated 24.07.2023, which continues to be in operation till 07.08.2024 and was extended by one more week by allowing the petitioner to challenge the order of dismissal by way of appropriate proceedings, which the petitioner has now initiated by way of instant petition.

05. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as on date petitioner continues to occupy the said post inspite of the issuance of order dated 09.02.2023 followed by order dated 30.04.2023, by virtue of which, respondent no. 5 has been appointed as Chowkidar of Takood. The order of dismissal which is impugned in the present petition was issued back dated with malafide intention, as the respondents have become hostile against the petitioner, as he has filed earlier petition whereby protection was granted to him by this Court and inspite of the issuance of the impugned order, the petitioner on the strength of the order dated 24.07.2023 passed by this Court is continuing as on date.

06. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length