STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: Justice Rahul Bharti, Judge High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, Jammu has quashed the termination order of Suresh Kumar Rekhi, Deputy General Manager (DGM), Jammu and Kashmir Projects Construction Corporation (JKPCCL) issued under order No 84 of 2021 dated July 29, 2021.
The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Manager (Civil) in 1993 on the basis of Permanent Resident Certificate (PRC). Later, the petitioner was booked under FIR 19/2014 by State Vigilance Organization Jammu on account of fake PRC which resulted in a legal course of action through which the authorities ordered cancellation of his PRC.
Upon this, the GAD in its order to JKPCC Jammu authorized the competent authority to terminate the services of Suresh Kumar Rekhi on the basis of fake PR certificate.
The petitioner in his writ petition pleaded against termination for violating the rules of natural justice without even putting him to any explanation and providing him opportunity of being heard. From the perusal of the impugned order, the court held that it cannot allow the respondents to say that grant of an opportunity of hearing against the purported basis upon which the petitioner’s engagement in service was sought to be terminated abinitio was to be and would be of no avail.
“In view of these facts and circumstances, the validity of impugned Order No 84 of 2021 dated July 29, 2021 is not salvable and, therefore, is held and declared illegal warranting to be set aside and is, accordingly, set aside. As a consequence of setting aside of the impugned Order No 84 of 2021 dated July 29, 2021, the petitioner shall be entitled to be restored to his service status with all consequential benefits except entitlement to monetary benefits of salary etc. for the period with effect from 29.07.2021 till passing of this judgment. Quashing of the impugned Order no. 84 of 2021 dated July 29, 2021 shall not debar the JKPCCL and/or the respondent No 4 for a de novo disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner for the alleged acts of omission and commission or and/or any other relatable cause by affording him opportunity of explaining and putting up his defence and thereupon to take action and pass appropriate orders in accordance the rules governing the service of the petitioner with the JKPCCL disposed off,” the HC observed.
