CW 6623/07 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6623/07 Devendrapal Singh Gaur Versus RSRTC & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 04/11/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. S.K. Singodiya, for petitioner Mr. G.S. Rathore, for respondents *** Instant petition has been filed by petitioner assailing order Ann.3 dt.28th December, 2006 whereby his services were terminated without holding domestic inquiry provided under the rules of Corporation. Petitioner was initially appointed as Driver vide order Ann.1 dt.12th April, 2006 for a period of two months from 12th April, 2006 to 30th June, 2006. But this fact has not been disputed that his services were extended by the respondents. On 6th November, 2006 an FIR No.323/06 came to be registered against him for rash & negligent driving u/ss.279 & 337 IPC at Police Station Hindoli, District Bundi. Registration of FIR against him was considered to be a breach of terms of condition of appointment. As a CW 6623/07 [2] consequence whereof, his services were terminated vide order Ann.3 dt.28th December, 2006. Similar issue came for consideration before this court as to whether for the alleged misconduct of rash & negligent driving, if at all there was any, for which FIR was registered can be taken to be a basis for terminating services of the petitioner. Division Bench of this court in Ramraj Gurjar Vs. Raj. State Road Transport Corporation through its Managing Director & Ors. [2008 WLC (UC)-485], observed as under: “The termination of the petitioner vide order dated 17th February, 2007 is not a termination simplicitor but is stigmatic as his services were sought to be brought to an end on the ground of alleged rash and negligent driving. A punitive order of termination from service has to be preceded by proper enquiry and in accordance with law otherwise such order of termination is rendered bad in law.” In the instant case, petitioner was working on temporary basis for a fixed term and his services were extended from time to time which has been terminated vide order impugned Ann.3 dt.28th December, 2006 on the ground of alleged rash & negligent driving without holding CW 6623/07 [3] departmental inquiry against him which certainly render the order of termination unsustainable. In the light of judgment [supra], the writ petition stands allowed. Order terminating services of petitioner Ann.3 dt.28th December, 2006 is hereby quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to reinstate him in service without back wages, however, it will not prevent the respondents in holding disciplinary inquiry against petitioner if they desire to do so and in that event the disciplinary inquiry shall not be influenced by the present order. No costs. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA6623CW07 4-11.doc