^tfcffii^ iiie^^. I S-^PS^ '143SS'4?< ';y^ y /•"•£•" rl": z ^^as^^ SiBSSS-gjsg•^ 9 Writ Petition ^7o. 3653,of2005 Pamieshwar Prasad Sahu, Son of G.R. Sahu, aged about 25 yeara, presently posted at Priman' School- Bhaismudi, District Janjgir-Champa 'versus 2. (C.G.) Collector, Janjgir, District°Tanjgir-Champa. Janpat Panchayat Nawagarh: thj-ough its Chief Executive Ofticer, Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) WSIT_PETmQN UNDER ARTICLE. 226/227 OF THE CONSTmjTION OF INDIA Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K.Agnihotri. Present: Ms. Anju Ahuja, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, P.L. for the respondent. Nol. Sliri Sandeep Dubey, counsel for respondent No.2. ORDERCORAL) Heai-d. (Passed on 26m Day ofJune, 2009) 2. The petitioner seeks to challenge the impugned order Annexure P- 3 wliereby the services ofthe petitioner was cancelled. The facts aimexed as projected by the petitioner is that the petitioner, through selection was appomted on the post of Shiksha Kamii Grade III by order dated 21-06- 2005 (Annexure P-1). Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner joiiied liis sefvices on 23-06-2005 (Annexiire P-2). Without assigning aay reason, an order was published in the newspaper (Annexure P-3) cancelmg the appomti'nent ofthe petitioner. 3. Lsamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this is a classical case of violation of principle of natural justice which amoun'ts to violation ofAilicle 14 ofthe Constitution oflndia. The petitioaer could not have been condenmed without afFording an opportunity of hearing. No show cause notice was giveti, no reasons were assigned and no tennination order to the petitioaer Vk'tiich was published in the newspaper was handed over or endorsed to the petitioiier. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner relies on a decision ofthis Court in Kii.Punam & others vs. State ofC.G. & others, 2008 (2) CGLJ 366. 4. Leamed counsel appearmg for respondents No.l & 2 submitted that the facts as projected by the petitioner are not in dispute. The 1C\^w- ^•'^-"^, '"%, ;;' s n.Y; fSf ^Bstt^' .•s' appointaient of the petitioner was suspended on account of certain deficiencies in the certificates. The petitioner continued on tlie post of Shiksha Karmi under order dated 12-08-2005 passed by this Court. This Court considered the identical issue in a batch ofmatters m the case ofKu. Punam (supra) wherein tliis Court obsen'ed as under: "22. The cases on hand are not the cases of cancellation of the selection process, tlie selection process have not been found vitiated on account of any reason includuig mass copying or mass iiTegularities. The present cases are w&ere the appointment orders, after having given effect to, have been cancelled subsequently, on discovery 6f soine facts that some of the candidates liad submitted false and forged documents to obtain the appointments. 23. Applying the well settled piinciples of law to the facts of the present cases, the respoadents/authorities have akeady prepared a second select list on the basis ofthe selections heid eariier. On scrutinv, most of the candidates fbiuid piace in t2ie second list and their aripointinsms are contisiiiisig. as sucli, yoiiis ot the csinciici^tes could. IIG'T tind u Dl<ici5 iii Tiie ssco.uo- iiSi £i±is-T sCii.i[ii2.\- on uccouii? 01 c^oiiOi.p-'.i uocumeirts subnirtted bv them. it ss, tneretore, directea tlsat &e caiididstes who havs ao found place in the second seiect list be afforded an opportunity of hearing to establish genuineness, truthfiilness ofthe documaits submitted by them for obtainmg appointment on the posts before their appointmeiits made sarlier are caiice!2ed." 5. Having regard to tlie fact situation ot the case, as the petitioner was ailowed to contiiiue iti sen'ice during pendency of tliis writ petition, it is directed tliat fhe petitioner shall continue on the post until the petitioner is found guilty on any count after holding fhe proper enquiry, if so advised. Liberty is reserved to the respondents. 6. In view ofthe foregoing, tlie petition stands allowed to the above extent. _____.—-—- Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge