Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Post of process server in Sushil Kumar Saini vs The State Of U.P. on 1 August, 2019Matching Fragments
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.
Under challenge is the order of termination dated 18.03.1993, passed by the opposite party No. 2 (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition).
Facts, in brief, of the present case are that vide order dated 10.08.1992 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition), the original petitioner Late Sushil Kumar Saini was appointed on the post of Process Server in the pay-scale of Rs. 750-940 under U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (in short "Rules of 1974"). Subsequently, he was appointed on the post of Mali vide order No. 3 dated 12.01.1993 passed by the opposite party No. 2. Thereafter, the service of the original petitioner Late Sushil Kumar Saini was terminated vide order dated 18.03.1993.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record carefully.
It appears from the record including the orders dated 10.08.1992 and 12.01.1993 that Late Sushil Kumar Saini was appointed under the Rules of 1974 on the post of Process Server and thereafter, on the post of Mali and his services were terminated vide order dated 18.03.1993 in violation of the principles of natural justice as well as without following the procedure prescribed under the Rules of 1930.