Termination without due process is arbitrary and violates the principle of natural justice, constituting a violation of constitutional provisions.

Pramath Patnaik, J.

In the aforesaid writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for quashing the order as contained in Memo No. 1464 dated 13.12.2011 passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra vide Annexure-5 pertaining to termination of the petitioner and the petitioner has further prayed for release the salary after reinstatement in services from October, 2011 till the date of reinstatement.

2. The brief facts as depicted in the writ petition is that in pursuance to advertisement published in newspaper for appointment of Teachers in Primary Schools of Government of Jharkhand, the petitioner applied for the said posts and vide memo dated 24.12.2003, he was appointed under the signature of the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra along with other similarly situated Teachers. During time of appointment, no verification of the certificate was done. After lapse of three years, in the year 2006, the petitioner was asked to produce the marks sheet in original which was produced before the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra. The same was also verified from Bihar School Examination Board. The salary of the petitioner was stopped for the time being thereafter, it was released after the verification of the certificate. It has been averred in the writ application that in the year 2011, the petitioner was asked to pay illegal gratification by respondent no. 8 and the petitioner expressed his inability to pay. Thereafter, a letter dated 17.09.2011 was issued to the petitioner whereby the testimonial submitted by the petitioner were found to be suspicious and the salary of the petitioner got stopped vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition. It is stated that neither any enquiry was conducted nor any show cause was issued to the effect that if any manipulation or forgery had been committed by the petitioner. It has further been submitted in the writ application, the authorities of the Chhotanagpur Primary Teachers' College, Ranchi from where the petitioner has completed the Primary Teachers' course was not examined nor any inquiry was conducted, as to whether mark sheet issued by the Bihar School Examination Board through the Chhotanagpur Primary Teachers' College, Ranchi showing total marks 938 were correct or not? Without making endeavour for conducting an inquiry to find out the truth, the impugned order of termination dated 13.12.2011, by the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra, was issued vide Annexure-5 to the writ petition. From the termination order, it transpires that another mark sheet has been issued to the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra wherein the marks obtained by the petitioner has been shown 953 i.e. 15 more marks obtained in comparison to earlier marks sheet. This created doubt in the mind of the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra. Being aggrieved by the order, the petitioner submitted appeal/representation before the Director, Primary Education, Government of Jharkhand on 18.01.2012 vide Annexure-7 but the said representation has failed to evoke any response from the respondents. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 13.12.2011 vide Annexure-5, the petitioner left with no other alternative remedy, has knocked the doors of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.

3. Mr. R.S.P. Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner during course of hearing has vehemently submitted that the impugned order of termination has been issued without holding any inquiry and without issuance of any show cause, therefore, the impugned order is not legally sustainable. Learned senior counsel further submits that the action of the respondent in terminating the petitioner from the services vide Annexure-5 amounts to arbitrary exercise of power, in breach of principle of natural justice, which is violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

4. Controverting the avermen