Removal from office necessitates adherence to principles of natural justice, including the right to be informed of allegations and to respond adequately.

JUDGMENT :

Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.

1. Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the appellant and learned AC to GA-V.

2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 18-09-24 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) no. 916 of 2024 whereby and whereunder, the prayer for quashing of the notification as contained in Memo No. 406 dated 12-02-2024, by which the writ petitioner/appellant has been removed from the post of Member, Jharkhand State Commission for Protection of Child Rights with immediate effect, has been rejected.

3. The factual aspects of the case as could be gathered from the averments made in the writ application is that a notice dated 14-07-2021 was published in the JAP-IT Recruitment Portal inviting applications for appointment to the vacant post of Chairperson and Members of Jharkhand State Commission for Protection of Child Rights in the State of Jharkhand. The writ petitioner, being qualified, had applied for the post of Member, Jharkhand State Commission for Protection of Child Rights and being successful, he was appointed vide notification as contained in Memo No. 2666 dated 28-11-2022. The writ petitioner had accordingly given his joining on 16-12-2022 and started discharging his duty. The writ petitioner was issued a show cause by letter as contained in Memo No. 2331 dated 18-08-2023 and was directed to file a show cause reply within two weeks. A show cause reply was submitted by the writ petitioner on 08-09- 2023 denying the allegations levelled against him. To enquire into the allegations levelled against the writ petitioner, a four- member committee was constituted by order as contained in Memo No. 3102 dated 12-12-2023 and the writ petitioner was directed to appear before the committee on 21-12-2023. A detailed show cause was also filed after which vide notification as contained in Memo No. 406 dated 12-02-2024, the writ petitioner was removed from the post of Member, Jharkhand State Commission for Protection of Child Rights with immediate effect in pursuance of Section 7 (2)(e) of the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act , 2005. This notification was under challenge in W.P.(S) No. 916 of 2024 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 18-09-2024 which is the order impugned to the present appeal.

4. It has been submitted by Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the writ petitioner/appellant that the learned Single Judge had failed to appreciate that the copy of the Enquiry Report dated 27-12-2013 was never served upon the writ petitioner which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. The writ petitioner was not given any opportunity to cross-examine the complainant and the witnesses.

5. Learned AC to G.A.-V has submitted that sufficient opportunity was given to the writ petitioner to defend his case and after considering the show cause submitted by him the order of removal of the writ petitioner from the post of Member, Jharkhand State Commission for Protection of Child Rights was passed. The learned Single Judge has correctly come to a conclusion that there was no violation of the principles of natural justice and, therefore, this appeal deserves to be dismissed.

6. The impugned notification to the writ application as contained in Memo No. 406 dated 12-02-2024 has taken recourse to Section 7 (2)(e) of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, while removing the writ petitioner from the post of Member, Jharkhand State Commission for Protection of Child Rights. of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 reads as under:

“7. (1) Subject to the pro