m,;B 18 .(?', s"i'-'- ^ j3* •,(»' f-l» :13i;:S,',l,% f- W. .0'^ :yfi):I.B)'^e'':;s'1^-" ^^.:hff,:''Q^^i:Q (h.,q^s ,0(1) 'K'^ii'w::ia'9 %'l'%l^:;;;(a' 'i^'lK&^ .if^^'ts'.:'^^; •f^ • Q': :W ^'^''s'^^'r- l''m?^iS;;.g';WI:;tr'1 -•W.:'I-'..:?.-.'.;-"'''.^ .-;!(fe'..S ,;®'''M ^^w '.S.M'".''?'-' ^.^^^s':- .1;?':":(B...'T3;' !<!::,,tfc :''':ja,:i "'l?''--.CT?'lf: '•"i.^'r'^OTS'w"-'- ,^1-e1; ••:•.!:<.!if,,l$):,;.1, ,.»'";:i:IN.;',i3';';<»:;•:.S 'w.^h'w it<t.'il:'ll:: .w. ;M'''il:'.'m' ^S'"s;::':,'ff 7'* "^'.•^'.''•. ^Qtt u' '&t,, '@<ia,^,.,n~Et S-SirW- ;-»•: 91 ; ^''.: •©.W i:)f :t8.,:.rf^'i» ®v;^ ws' s:!^ ^ y^^ @:'.;?" 'tB li' s^, SSE ^^^•f^Ss ^f^i-y^^ ^ l^y :i:;r .i^ •V ~^'L- -^.. 4 s's.s^ SWSSSK9SS •53S^^s^^ss^ ^'^^-'^•^.'s^ -'fcg^ 6 Anir~REmar''SfeaEna" - , ;-< ''" ":. : • :':'1.:IC;:"'5 'SGB of SKrl. Ratatoamar SfaartBa, , 1: ';^"' ^' - - ' '. aged aboat; 27 yaars, • ocetipatien Gran Safagyak, . ' . ' Beivelepaeat Block Kenta, Bi.s tt. Bastar, S.S. 7 Parwendca Kwnar Sawlta' son of Sepal Prasad Sawlta. aged sboai: 28 years, ' . , iSram Sabayak, I3evelopment Block Konta, E>!.striet: Bsstar, M.P. 8 Dlli.p Kwiar Hls^ra, son ef Awadh Bllaari Hlshr aged abocifc 27 years. occupa-tion eram Sa&ayak, Development: Block Konta. Blstt. Bastar, H.P. 9 Badara Singh Yadav son of AsharaBi 'SaQav, aged abeufr 29 years. occapatl.en Grain Sahayak» DevelopiBent Bloc'k: Koylibeda. Dlstt. Bastar 10 Bipln Blbari Sharma son of Dayaram Sharma. aged aboiil: 30 years, eccupation Graia Sahayak, EevelopHient Block Osoor, Blstt;. Bastar, M.P. 11 Santosh Knaar Kalawat, son ef Nafctanrain Kalawa aged aboat 22 years, cicc-upatioB ©ramsaha?a>., -•/•':•• Developraent; Block Koyilbeda, Distt. Bastar 12 Hamarayan.Goswamt son ef Uktilal, aged aboat 29 yegxs, occupatlon Gram Sahaya'ic, Bevelopaeat Bloclc Bbalramgarh, Distt. Bastar 13 Kashiraa ablrwaF, son of Kamta Prssad, aged sbout 34 years, ©ccupationGraa Sahayk, DevelopsiieBt; Block Dantewar, Dlst't. Bastar 14 Kallash Prasad Sahu, son ef Nafehuraffi SaliQ, aged aboufc 28 yearsm occapati.oB Graffi Sahayak Ee-ysloiaaen fc Block Bijapur, Blsfet. Basfear. 15 Oayaram Bedla, son of Bainaas Bedta, aged ^soBt; 27 years, occupatlon Graia Sahayak. Developnenfc Block, Usoor, *i'ist;<:. Bastar 16 Sarendra Kamar Pasfcore, san of Shanibha Pras Pastore, aged about 25 years, eccupation GraHi SaYtaya, tevelopBent: Block KOyllbeda, Blstt. Bastar, R.P. aged afeoafe 27: years, eec-upalTloa ©raa Sa'haya'k,' Bloek BevelepBeny Charassa* (SlstrlG^Bast^r, M.P. 18 Bajendra Konar Tadav, sea ®fefahotelal Ya<3av, aged abeut; 28 years, oceupatlen ^r}^'5'^&A Sraa Sahgyak, Bevelepneafc Bleek 'e^Stee,. Bistt;. Basfear, M.P. 19 Rakesb Kamar Pastore, soa of Kanta Prasad aged abeafc 27 years, occupation Gran Sabayak* Bsvelopaeat. Bleck Bhopal PatnsfR, Blsfct. Bastac, H.P. 20 Rajendra Knmar Soswaai, son of Ramswaroop, aged about 27 years, occupati.oB Gram Sabayak, Bevelepment Block Sakfea* Dlstt;. Bsstar, H.p. 21 Vijay Slngb Bhe.dorlYa, sen Qf Kua-Hsr. Si.ngh ; Bhataariya, e©eaafecmfc 28 years» occapa- |. ti.on Gran SahayaK, Block Bevelopment Konta,^ di stri.et Bastar, M.P.' 22 Pradeep Kumar Mj.sbra» soa of Awa<ah Blharl, aged aboufc 23 years. occupation Gram Sahayak, Developaent Bleek Konta, dlstrict Bastar, H.P. . 23 Ball S-asi son of Sopal Rare, aged abeat 3©years, eGcupation ©raBiSahayak, Be'velepment Block Koyllbeda, Bistt Bastar AHD RESPOHDEHTS ..-£-'l)Sfcate of Haabya Pradesh, throagla the Secretary Beptt. of Panchgyat & Secial Welfare, Bhopal. H.P. 2 Joint Blrector. Panchayat and Social • Welfa.re, Saipur. 3')Sy. Blrector,Paachayat & Social 'B&lfare. BastaF» Blstt. Bastar, H.P. ^^^s^s^ -fr ?M<C. \ -1»> 1,^ 1 1 Is s iu^ g' ... w a S . rt- O ff tg S fi >0 <yo .•-t sp |f-h ' ^t §; a> •§ 1 tt 0H 01cr1: d> 1^1 ;@»m SSM r/.. :^'s \^4 '\-;•.;.' '^';^: :TM M II vwss '^ssx '^:iV.-;-t-: ^s MWS, »1 \w; aaasa S a^ily -WSWM ^^ssss ;'S'tii&St:iSS-Ssat!S^QS& SsK HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0.23 OF 2006 PETITIONERS Maithili Sharan Ahirwar & Others RESPONDENTS Versus State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh) & Others Single Bench : Hon'ble ShriSatish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Rajeev Shrivastava & Shri Ved Prakash Nema, Advocates forthe petitioners. Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate forthe State. ORDER(ORAU (Passedon this29thdayofApril, 2011) 1. Heard learned counselfor the parties. ;; 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitionerssubmits that the respondent authorities created the posts of Gram Sahayak in the Department of Panchayat and Social Welfare. The age limit for the said post was betv/een 21 to33years and the qualification for the said post was possession of 10 + 2, examination certificate. Pursuant to the said scheme, the petitioners were appointed pn the post of Gram Sahayakbyorderdated 8.7.1994 (Annexure A- 2) on temporary basis. Thereafter, the petitioners joined in their respective place of posting and performed their duties with great sincerity and honestly. Even the petitioners were sent for training. However, all ofa sudden bythe impugned order dated 19-11-1994 (Annexure A-1), the services of the petitioners were termmated. The impugned order has been passed by the respondent authorities without following the basic principles of natural justice and without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Thus, this petition. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State subrrtits-thSt the petitioners were not appointed in accordance with the eonstitutional scheme of employment, as they were appointed on the basis of their applications, without their being any advertisement or publication of notice, inviting application for all the eligible candidatesfor the post. 4. It is evident that the petitioners were not appointed in accordance with the constitutional scheme of employment, as without any advertisement or examination or interview, the appointments were made. Theappointment ofthe petitioners was purely on temporary basis. It is an admitted position that the petitioners were not appointed against any sanctioned post. The appointments were made on the basis of memo dated 6.6.1994 (Annexure R-3) issued by the Deputy Secretary, Panchayat & Rural Development Department, Government of the then State of Madhya Pradesh. On query, it was found that no such memo was issued by the Government, the memo itself was forged. The respondents in their return submits that on enquiry, it was found that the Commissioner, Bastar Division, did not make any selection and did not issue any select list of the candidate for appointment ofthe petitioners. The Commissioner, Bastar Division, informed the Joint Director, Panchayat & Social Welfare, Raipur, that no select list of candidates was sent by him. Thereafter, the Additional Secretary jn the office of the Chief Minister had informed to the Director, Panchayat & Social Welfare on 23.11.1994 (Annexure R-6) to take steps against the officers responsible for the same. ^' (T The Secretary, Panchayat & Rural Development Departr then State of Madhya Pradesh, by letter dated 11.11.1994 (Annexure R-7), informed the Director, Panchayat & Social Welfare, that the appointment of the Gram Sahayak in DistriGt Bastar have been made on the basis of forged letter dated 6.6.1994, and subsequent tetters dated 16.08.1994 & 30.08.1994, were also fabricated. The appointment order was based on letter dated 6.6.1994, sent by the Deputy Secretary, which was found forged. Thus, the Director, Panchayat & Social Welfare, was directed to take steps for removal of the Gram Sahayak, who were illegally appointed and to initiate departmental action against the Joint Director, Panchayat & Social Welfare, who had indulged into such illegal practice. On enquiry, it was found that the appointments were not made under any scheme or by alleged selection made by the Commissioner, Bastar Division. Accordingly, the petitioners were removed from service by the impugned order. The appointment of the petitioners were based on the forged documents. Thus, the appointments were bad from its inception and it cannot be validated on the basis that they had been sent for training. The Supreme Court, while considering the identical scenario in the matter of R.S. Garg v. State ofil.P. observed as under :- "18. ............ At the relevant point of time, the Rule provided for selection through the Public Service Commission. The same having not been done, the appointment of the 3rd respondent was void ab initio. The question of regutarisation of his services, therefore, did notarise." _jU-i^ 7. In State of Orissa & Another v. Mamta Mohant/ the Courtobserved as under:- me "37. It is a settled legal proposition that if an order is bad in its inception, it does not get sanctified at a laterstage. A subsequent action/ development cannot validate an action which was not lawful at its inception, for the reason that the illegality strikes at the root of the order. It would be beyond the competence of any authority to validate such an order. It would be ironic to permit a person to rely upon a law, in violation of which he has obtained the benefits. If an order at the intial stage is bad in law, then all furi:her proceedings consequent thereto will be non est and have to be necessarily set aside. A right in law exists only and onlywhen it has a lawful origine. (Vide Upen Chandra Gogoi v. State of Assam, Mangal Prasad Tamoli v. Narvadeshwar Mishra and Ritesh Tewari y, State of U.P.)" 8. The next contention of the petitioner that they ought to have been afforded an opportunity of hearing in compliance with the principle of natural justice, fails on a simple ground that the petitioners were appointed on the basis offorged and fabricated documents, and as such, termination of their services, as being the only consequence. The facts are indisputable. Thus, observance ofthe principles of natural justice would be nothing more than an empty formality. (See - Union oflndia v. BishamberDas Dogra ) 9. Applying the well settled principles of !aw to the facts of the present case and forthe reasons mentioned hereinabove, thewrit petition, being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. -— --— Sd/- 10. There shall be no order asto costs. S.K. Agnihotri Judge RB' ^K ^ „!, f i h'iS-L ^f, ~~A': ' •-'-' s;'' w ' ! '/:'li r:.l ^ (2011) 3 SCC 436 '(2009) 13 SCC 102 fc-1 r;ti-Vb W-e