1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10954/2009 Mahendra Kumar Prajapat. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10954/2009 Mahendra Kumar Prajapat. vs. State of Rajasthan and others. DATE OF ORDER: 21.11.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.JVS Deora, for the petitioner. ------ Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner was given appointment under agreement Annex.2 and then the petitioner was served with the notice Annex.4 dated 23.6.2009 wherein there are 7 serious allegations against the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel submitted that this notice was replied by the petitioner but the copy of the reply is not placed on record and according to learned counsel for the petitioner, that copy is not available with the petitioner. Then the petitioner was again given notice on 2 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10954/2009 Mahendra Kumar Prajapat. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 4.7.2009 and from this, it appears that the petitioner admitted on earlier occasion that he will not repeat the misconduct again. The petitioner then submitted his reply Annex.6 wherein he submitted that some of the wrong has been remedied and now he will not commit a mistake again. The explanation given by the petitioner was not found sufficient for continuation of his services and the petitioner's service has been terminated as per condition no.6(1) of the contract. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no enquiry was conducted and without there being any enquiry, the petitioner's service has been terminated. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the documents placed on record. It is clear that serious allegations were levelled against the petitioner and he was given opportunity to submit his plea but as per the plea 3 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10954/2009 Mahendra Kumar Prajapat. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. submitted by the petitioner, he virtually admitted his misconduct and his explanation, whatever it may be, was not found satisfactory and thereafter, his services were terminated. The principle of natural justice has been complied with and, therefore, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. Consequently, this writ petition, having no merits, is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya/-