Rajasthan High Court: The Bench of Inderjeet Singh, J., allowed a writ petition made for reinstating the petitioners with continuity of service on the ground that the termination order was illegal.
The Court solely relied on the case of Pragati v. State of Rajasthan, SBCWP No. 234/2019 which had similar facts, wherein, the petitioners were working on the post of Sweeper having been appointed after being selected through lottery system. Their services were terminated without giving them any notice on the ground that they were appointed on the post of different category. The advertisement did not bifurcate posts between SC/ST candidates and there is no procedure to identify as to who were appointed against SC post and who were appointed against ST post. It was established that fault had occurred at the level of the Municipal Corporation, but as far as the posts were concerned, they were lying with the corporation. It was argued that the work of Sweeper is common and there is no such identifiable mark to recognize whether an individual Sweeper was appointed against SC/ST post. In absence of any candidate of ST Category, the appointments for the post of Sweeper could not have been left vacant. It was argued that for the fault of the respondents, petitioners could not be deprived of their right to continue in employment. Further, principles of natural justice were also not followed and no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioners
The Court, accordingly, held the order to be illegal and unjustified and the same was quashed and set aside with directions to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service. [Barkha Devi v. State Of Rajasthan, 2019 SCC OnLine Raj 274, Order dated 01-03-2019]