1977 JTR(MP) 255
1977 2 MPWN 46
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
G.L. Oza, P.D. Mulye, JJ.
Virendra Kumar Sharma - Petitioner
Vs.
State of M.P. and others - Respondents
M.P. No. 263 of 1976 (I)
Decided On : 21-04-1977
Act Referred :CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.311(2)
Constitution of India - Art.311(2) - order of termination casting no stigma on the petitioner - Court cannot probe into other correspondence to find out that the impugned order was by way of punishment - order not open to challenge.
Short Note
It was a petition filed by the petitioner against an order terminating his services as a part - time lecturer in Law in the Government Arts and Commence College, Indore, by orders passed by the Government dated 22 December 1975.
Held : It is not disputed before this Court that if it is an order of termination simpliciter without attaching any stigma on the petitioner, the order cannot be challenged. But the contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner was that from the copy of the order sent to the Principal of the College referring to a letter from the Principal it goes to show that the order of termination was in response to some letter from the Principal wherein complaints were made against the petitioner, and looking to these circumstances, it was contended, that the order is not an order of termination simpliciter but amounts to a punishment. It is now well settled that this Court should not look into the correspondence to find out whether the action taken against the petitioner was because of certain complaint against him or not, especially, when the order passed against the petitioner is an order which does not attach any stigma. Consequently the contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. State of U.P. v. Ramchandra Trivedi, AIR 1976 SC 2547 relied on. Petition dismissed.
Short Note
It was a petition filed by the petitioner against an order terminating his services as a part - time lecturer in Law in the Government Arts and Commence College, Indore, by orders passed by the Government dated 22 December 1975.
Held : It is not disputed before this Court that if it is an order of termination simpliciter without attaching any stigma on the petitioner, the order cannot be challenged. But the contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner was that from the copy of the order sent to the Principal of the College referring to a letter from the Principal it goes to show that the order of termination was in response to some letter from the Principal wherein complaints were made against the petitioner, and looking to these circumstances, it was contended, that the order is not an order of termination simpliciter but amounts to a punishment. It is now well settled that this Court should not look into the correspondence to find out whether the action taken against the petitioner was because of certain complaint against him or not, especially, when the order passed against the petitioner is an order which does not attach any stigma. Consequently the contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. State of U.P. v. Ramchandra Trivedi, AIR 1976 SC 2547 relied on. Petition dismissed.