Rocky Kumar vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned Advocate for the State.

The petitioner has approached this Court on being aggrieved by the order as contained in Memo No. 3088 dated 20.06.2026 issued under the Signature of the Deputy Director, Bihar State Sports Authority, Patliputra Sports Complex, Kankarbagh, Patna, whereby and whereunder the services of the petitioner from the post of Weightlifter Trainer has been terminated.

Briefly stated, the petitioner was duly appointed as Assistant Coach of Weightlifting on contract basis at Khelo India Centre of Excellence in Patna, Bihar vide Annexure-P/1 to the writ petition. After having been appointed on contract basis, the petitioner started extending training and there had never been any complaint, however, all of a sudden, a surprise inspection was conducted at the Sports Academy, Rajgir, Nalanda and on being found certain irregularities, including the presence of certain medicines and injections that were completely banned, an enquiry was conducted which led to termination of the petitioner vide office order contained in Memo No. 3088 dated 20.06.2026 issued by the Deputy Director, Bihar State Sports Authority.

Referring to the impugned order, copy of which is marked as Annexure-P/4 it is vehemently contended by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that neither copy of the enquiry report has been served upon the petitioner nor any notice has been issued or opportunity of hearing has been provided and, as such, the entire action dispensing the services of the petitioner suffers from vice of arbitrariness, besides in complete violation of the principles of natural justice.

On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State referring to the offer letter, copy of which is marked as Annexure-P/1, submitted that the petitioner has the remedy in case of any dispute before the Director General, Sports Authority of India, however, instead of approaching the said Authority, the present writ petition is filed and, as such, in view of the efficacious alternative remedy available to the petitioner, the present writ petition is not maintainable.

Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and on perusal of the materials available on record, especially the impugned order, copy of which is marked as Annexure-P/4, this Court is of the considered opinion that before passing the impugned order of termination, prima facie, the petitioner has neither been served with any notice along with enquiry report nor the final order has been passed based upon the response furnished by the petitioner and, as such, is clearly found to be in complete violation of the principles natural justice.

Suffice it to observe that irrespective of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner if the respondent authorities fail to follow the principles of natural justice that certainly gives a cause to the petitioner to approach this Court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India without availing alternative remedy.

On the aforesaid grounds alone, this Court finds the impugned order suffers from vice of arbitrariness, besides there is no compliance of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the order contained in Memo No. 3088 dated 20.06.2026 issued under the signature of the Deputy Director, Bihar State Sports Authority, Patliputra Sports Complex, Kankarbagh, Patna is hereby set aside. The matter is relegated to the concerned authority to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner alongwith the enquiry report and after affording him a proper opportunity of hearing, pass a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law.

It is expected that the entire exercise must be completed preferably within a period of three months.

The writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.