AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The services of the petitioner as Home Guard (811) was terminated on 31.08.2022 on the ground that the petitioner was involved in a criminal case, subsequently he was acquitted from the criminal charges.
Now, the present Writ Petition is filed to direct the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner into services as Home Guard on the ground that termination of the petitioner without considering the representation of the petitioner is bad in law.
Admittedly, the respondents have issued notice dated 10.08.2020 calling for explanation from the petitioner. However, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 28.08.2020. Without considering the said explanation, termination order was ordered by the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without taking note of the explanation impugned action is taken contending that the action is taken without hearing the petitioner, without considering explanation to the show cause notice, the same is stigmatic in nature and therefore, would be done only after proper enquiry is conducted. Therefore, the counsel prays for interference into the matter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the order in W.P. Nos.23101 of 2021 batch. I am the Party to the Order. A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2025, observing as follows:
“Despite the respondents having terminated the petitioners without adhering to due process and the Audi Alteram Partem doctrine, the justification or otherwise for the terminations remain to be examined after issuance appropriate show cause notices. There may be valid grounds for the discontinuation also. However, this Court in the light of the conclusions arrived at supra and the orders in W.P. No.35460 of 2013 & batch dated 08.06.2018 as also in the better interest of the petitioners/ Home Guards opines that they shall attend and pass the physical fitness test to be conducted by the respondent authorities. Depending on the result in the physical fitness test, the deserving candidates shall be reinstated as Home Guards. Any such reinstatement, however, shall not confer benefit of any kind to the Home Guards / petitioners like seniority, back wages etc.”
And stated that the petitioner’s case is identical in nature and requested to pass similar order.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has not refuted the same.
Therefore, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present Writ Petition in terms of the order dated 15.07.2025 in W.P. No.23101 of 2021 and batch. This Court while disposing of the above writ petition has directed that the petitioners shall attend and pass physical fitness test to be conducted by the respondent authorities and depending upon the result in the physical fitness test, the petitioners can reinstate as Home Guard.
Acceding the request made by the counsel for the petitioner, the present Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to call for the physical fitness test, petitioner herein directed to attend the physical fitness test to be conducted by the respondent authorities and the respondent authorities are directed to pass appropriate orders on the basis of the result in the physical fitness test. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.